Notices


Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.


GURPS: Formalizing and Rationalizing GURPS

   
The reason is seems counter-intuitive is because it's opposite of the first system you learned, D&D. For those from NA, in England driving of the left seems counter-intuitive (and vice versa).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveW View Post
Is this true, since when R=S it means success in either syatem?
I'm not terribly sure what you are saying here--R=S is indeed a sufficient condition for success, but it's not a necessary one. The difference is whether you have to roll over or under S, with S inclusive.

I should clarify that I don't personally find the roll condition counterintuitive, but rather have heard others deeming it so. I have no qualms with the under rule; indeed, I find it much easier to work with.

I find the rolling under makes sense.

d20 : as you increase a skill your bonus to your rolls increases, making it easier to score a success based on a static set of DC's. The DC for jumping over that low wall never changes, you just get better at doing it. Its a fair enough system.

GURPS : as your skill increases you increase the target number required for success, therefore making it easier to roll a success. To take into account attempting more difficult activities you can either (and I dont know which GURPS does) apply penalties to the target number, by lowering the target score, or apply penalties to the dice roll, by increasing what is on dice.

Both systems work just as well, and its only a matter of personal preference which you would rather use and which you can get your head around easier. For some people its easier to work with the static DC's, while for others its easier to work with the fluid success targets.

One of the main difference in roll-over is that the player knows the bonuses and penalties. For roll-under, the player often has to guess.

BTW, in GURPS, roll bonuses and penalties are applied to the target number only.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnhcorey View Post
the reason is seems counter-intuitive is because it's opposite of the first system you learned, d&d. For those from na, in england driving of the left seems counter-intuitive (and vice versa).
qft

Thanks Shawn, I wasnt sure which it was. And I'm sure theres other systems that would do it to the roll.

Basically what I am saying is that generally roll-over is a static target with a fluid bonus, while roll-under is a fluid target with a static bonus (in most cases, 0).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ishar View Post
Thanks Shawn, I wasnt sure which it was. And I'm sure theres other systems that would do it to the roll.

Basically what I am saying is that generally roll-over is a static target with a fluid bonus, while roll-under is a fluid target with a static bonus (in most cases, 0).
No, the bonuses, as well as penalties, is applied to the target number. The rolls are un-modified.

That exactly what I said, a static bonus of 0

I think the initial quote should be altered.

Roll over is (R+M)>T

Roll under is R<T where T is S-M

(sorry, dont know how to do the equal on it)

Roll over: R+B-P >= T

Roll under: R <= T+B-P

Where:
  • R = roll
  • B = bonuses
  • P = penalties
  • T = target

In both systems, bonuses are added; penalties subtracted.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status