Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

    Originally posted by TheGreyWulf View Post
    Actually, the only consideration made in D&D5E was the die roll. So when I ported it over, I made the same consideration.

    A natural 1d20 roll has a range of 1 to 20, with a median of 10.5. Rounding down, that's 10. So, 10 + Perception.

    A natural 3d6 roll has a range of 3 to 18, with a median of 10.5. Rounding down, that's 10. So, 10 + Perception + Focus.
    If there is an argument to take the median of each die, then the 1d6 has a median of 3 (rounded down). So that's 9 + Perception + Focus.

    There several considerations in D&D5E that effect passive perception. There is even a feat that gives +5 to your passive perception at all times(Observant) .

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

      Originally posted by shonuff View Post
      I'do say it's still passive, because I'm calling for the roll - they're just doing the physical rolling. And that meta-gaming still happens when the GM is rolling. Don't think that because you do it behind a screen that they can't hear the roll.
      That's the thing: I don't roll anything. I just set TNs according to how I perceive the gravity of the object of interest. If they're enemies trying to hide, I also have predetermined numbers that I take as their roll. Unless it's a really important thing (like a boss hiding in the shadows), in which case I'd most likely rolled prior to game night.

      Like I said, nobody is the wiser when nobody makes an active check and the Passive Perception fails.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

        Originally posted by Power Mad View Post
        There several considerations in D&D5E that effect passive perception. There is even a feat that gives +5 to your passive perception at all times(Observant) .
        I meant that they only considered the median when they set that base number (10) in the Passive Perception. I think it follows from the "Take 10" mechanic.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

          Originally posted by TheGreyWulf View Post
          That's the thing: I don't roll anything. I just set TNs according to how I perceive the gravity of the object of interest. If they're enemies trying to hide, I also have predetermined numbers that I take as their roll. Unless it's a really important thing (like a boss hiding in the shadows), in which case I'd most likely rolled prior to game night.

          Like I said, nobody is the wiser when nobody makes an active check and the Passive Perception fails.
          I don't think I'm keen on using a passive stat vs. a determined TN without any rolling, whatsoever. I like some element of chance.

          As for pre-rolling, that strikes me as something I definitely wouldn't want to do for potential plot points. There are too many cries that GMs cheat all rolls regardless!

          Truth be told, though, I just find it easier to assign a TN and make them roll than it is to keep a separate PER sheet.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

            Originally posted by shonuff View Post
            I don't think I'm keen on using a passive stat vs. a determined TN without any rolling, whatsoever. I like some element of chance.

            As for pre-rolling, that strikes me as something I definitely wouldn't want to do for potential plot points. There are too many cries that GMs cheat all rolls regardless!

            Truth be told, though, I just find it easier to assign a TN and make them roll than it is to keep a separate PER sheet.
            Yeah, pre-rolling requires a certain degree of trust from the group. I guess I'm lucky I have that kind of group. And I'm an honest person. No, really, I am. I just speak Infernal in my sleep.

            As for a PER sheet, I guess we just run our tables differently. I use index cards with PC names, Max Health, Defense, Armor, Passives, and other notes. I also use these cards as initiative markers by hanging them in a certain order along the top edge of my GM screen, so they also see the initiative order. This way, I always see their Passives, and even their usually-targeted stats, so I don't need to ask. I just have them fill up the cards at the start of the session.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

              I enjoyed reading all of this feedback and most of it was great. I just would like to point out that this rule can and should be used by you guys. i think that having a GM make a secret roll adds to the mystery of the game and the contents therein. i do hope all of you have enjoyed my idea.

              In recap...
              NOTICE: 10+Perception+any applicable focus

              some examples are:
              To see a glimmering object hidden in a bush on a bright and sunny day...
              10+Perception (Seeing) if the GM fails the roll, then the person sees it.
              If the GM beats the number, it goes unnoticed by that character.

              Also...To hear a rustle in some nearby bushes while the party is in a heated discussion...
              10+Perception (Hearing) if the GM fails, then the person hears something that should not be there.
              if the GM beats the number, then that person is oblivious to the potential danger.

              One point i should make here though..and this comes from testing it last weekend...
              The GM should take down all players Notice and only roll once. if one person does not hear something doesn't mean someone else won't. it makes keeping track of who has and had not heard the danger a bit easier.

              Also, i only made the Players roll if they were actively looking or searching for something. if they were doing other things, that's when Notice came into play.

              Again i hope you have enjoyed this and thanks again for the feedback.

              Remember...The force is everywhere, so may the dice be always in your favor.
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAR0pWWHBadjJQdkU"]Age of Alchemy[/URL]
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAY1JteV9mQjhxamc"]Battlemap Rules based on HeroScape[/URL]
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAVzNDRUtWT0pjSnM"]Kingdom Hearts/Final Fantasy - Playtest version[/URL]
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpATDZrZUhXaHBJd00"]Magic Items Repository Volume 1[/URL]
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAcHVOdVUtajJnV1k"]Magic Items Repository Volume 2[/URL]
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAcWM5VWFhcXVZUEU"]FAGE-TitansGrave Random Character Generator[/URL]
              [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpANUxzNHo2aDYxejA"]20 races for FAGE...enjoy[/URL]
              [URL="https://vladgenx.wordpress.com/"]https://vladgenx.wordpress.com/[/URL] This is my new log Site i just created. it is going to have fantasy short story snippets for you guys. Enjoy

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                1. Not new, don't give WotC the credit of coming up with an idea. We the gamers have been doing secret gm rolls since 1974.
                2. If there it is important to the story the players should find it, if not than they should look for it or miss it.
                3. If you ask your players to roll and they fail, then meta "oh, there IS something...we look more" they are either terrible players, you are a soft gm, or you can add to the difficulty, tell them it takes them an hour, and there will be a consequence regardless.
                Long story short, stop adding to the gms job.
                Heretics are the only bitter remedy against the entropy of human thought.
                -Yevgeny Zamyatin

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                  Originally posted by Shotofentropy View Post
                  1. Not new, don't give WotC the credit of coming up with an idea. We the gamers have been doing secret gm rolls since 1974.
                  2. If there it is important to the story the players should find it, if not than they should look for it or miss it.
                  3. If you ask your players to roll and they fail, then meta "oh, there IS something...we look more" they are either terrible players, you are a soft gm, or you can add to the difficulty, tell them it takes them an hour, and there will be a consequence regardless.
                  Long story short, stop adding to the gms job.
                  1. Not new, true. I guess I'm not a gamer 'coz I've been doing secret GM rolls since 2009 or so. But, nah, I'm not much into tags and labels and such.

                  2. In your games, If there it is important to the story the players should find it, if not than they should look for it or miss it. In my games, I do whatever I feel like doing, and fortunately for me, my group tends to feel the same way.

                  3. You add to the difficulty, you add to the GM's job. You tell them it takes them an hour and think up a consequence, you add to the GM's job. You make a secret check and nobody noticed because it was secret, they don't metagame, you don't add to the difficulty, you don't have to come up with some consequence - I think you don't add to the GM's job as much.

                  Long story short, I can add whatever I want to my job as the GM. But then again, I'm the sort of GM that likes running her games with miniatures, walls, tokens, and stuff, so I must really love my job. Happy Gaming! ^_^

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                    I think the overall issue of players meta-gaming when they make a check is a moot point. Yeah, players meta-game when they are forced to make a check, but they also meta when the GM makes a secret check, or a scene is described, or an NPC is named. Players are going to meta-game, and while the players shouldn't rely on the information, the GM should also provide red herrings.

                    Originally posted by TheGreyWulf View Post
                    2. In your games, If there it is important to the story the players should find it, if not than they should look for it or miss it. In my games, I do whatever I feel like doing, and fortunately for me, my group tends to feel the same way.
                    Obviously your table will play as they will, but it's standard advice to give the players anything required for plot progression. Basically, a failed check shouldn't stall plot or roadblock the PCs.

                    3. You add to the difficulty, you add to the GM's job. You tell them it takes them an hour and think up a consequence, you add to the GM's job. You make a secret check and nobody noticed because it was secret, they don't metagame, you don't add to the difficulty, you don't have to come up with some consequence - I think you don't add to the GM's job as much.
                    while adding anything adds to the GM's difficulty, it's important to remember that some things add more. Which is more bookkeeping: keeping/updating list, making a secret check, and then comparing rolls to the derived stat; or assigning a TN and saying roll?

                    Granted, some times more work shows in the final result, but sometimes it's just more work.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                      Originally posted by Shotofentropy View Post
                      1. Not new, don't give WotC the credit of coming up with an idea. We the gamers have been doing secret gm rolls since 1974.
                      2. If there it is important to the story the players should find it, if not than they should look for it or miss it.
                      3. If you ask your players to roll and they fail, then meta "oh, there IS something...we look more" they are either terrible players, you are a soft gm, or you can add to the difficulty, tell them it takes them an hour, and there will be a consequence regardless.
                      Long story short, stop adding to the gms job.
                      first of all, i KNOW it is not new from D&D. if you pay attention, i got the idea by playing it recently and decided to try adding it into FAGE.
                      Secondly, ALL of my players love this idea and will continue to use it
                      Lastly, you need to read an entire forum before posting a dumbass post like this. you come off sounding like an extremely narrow-sighted a-hole.

                      I mean, i gave out an IDEA for thoughts and suggestions, which is what this forum is for. you can use it or not, it is up to you, but please think before you speak. if you don't like it that is fine, move on. if you have something viable to add to this discussion, then by all means, let me hear it. i value any opinion, but you are making baseless comments to sound smart. please, just...stop.
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAR0pWWHBadjJQdkU"]Age of Alchemy[/URL]
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAY1JteV9mQjhxamc"]Battlemap Rules based on HeroScape[/URL]
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAVzNDRUtWT0pjSnM"]Kingdom Hearts/Final Fantasy - Playtest version[/URL]
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpATDZrZUhXaHBJd00"]Magic Items Repository Volume 1[/URL]
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAcHVOdVUtajJnV1k"]Magic Items Repository Volume 2[/URL]
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpAcWM5VWFhcXVZUEU"]FAGE-TitansGrave Random Character Generator[/URL]
                      [URL="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0ByE2hNokDtpANUxzNHo2aDYxejA"]20 races for FAGE...enjoy[/URL]
                      [URL="https://vladgenx.wordpress.com/"]https://vladgenx.wordpress.com/[/URL] This is my new log Site i just created. it is going to have fantasy short story snippets for you guys. Enjoy

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                        An idea is just that - an idea. We're here to discuss these ideas - I don't think we're here to discuss if it's entirely new or who first came up with it. If there is a fully fleshed out mechanic and someone unrightfully claims credit then ofcourse let it be known and I'm sure it will be 'fixed' quickly, but even that would be a separate issue.

                        I suggest we leave it at that and move on.

                        It's true that such a mechanic might add to the GMs job, but as a group (players + GM) I'm sure this can be discussed to see if they want such a thing or not, you could even houserule 'core rules' to not use them if you find that they hurt your game. In other words if you don't want to use something, feel free not to.

                        As for the mechanic, I see that 10 is mentioned as the base number, while this is the median and in D&D most likely comes from the take 10 rule, I'm not sure if this is the right number. mldthree mentioned that he would use "6 + ability + ability focus" and this seems more fitting for the FAGE system, especially when looking at the "basic test difficulty' table on page 97.
                        The TN for average difficulty is 11 - if you use 10 as a base number and have an ability score of 3 you could already passively pass any challenging test, if you would have 5+focus you could passively pass any formidable test. To me this seems a bit much. If you would take 6 as the base number, with above ability scores, it would be 9 which results in passively passing an easy test and with a 5+focus you would be able to passively pass a challenging test.

                        In addition I think that doing something actively should wield a higher reward on average than doing something passively - "You're actively looking for" vs "You happen to notice". If you give them 10 for free, that's fairly hard to beat by rolling for it actively.

                        With a 1d20 there's an equal chance of rolling a 6, 10 or well any number, but with 3d6 this is not the case. The main difference with D&D is that in FAGE we use a bell curve as opposed to a lineair curve so any 'free' amount you add to the ability test has more impact in FAGE than it would have in D&D.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                          Originally posted by Gerben View Post
                          As for the mechanic, I see that 10 is mentioned as the base number, while this is the median and in D&D most likely comes from the take 10 rule, I'm not sure if this is the right number. mldthree mentioned that he would use "6 + ability + ability focus" and this seems more fitting for the FAGE system, especially when looking at the "basic test difficulty' table on page 97.
                          The TN for average difficulty is 11 - if you use 10 as a base number and have an ability score of 3 you could already passively pass any challenging test, if you would have 5+focus you could passively pass any formidable test. To me this seems a bit much. If you would take 6 as the base number, with above ability scores, it would be 9 which results in passively passing an easy test and with a 5+focus you would be able to passively pass a challenging test.

                          In addition I think that doing something actively should wield a higher reward on average than doing something passively - "You're actively looking for" vs "You happen to notice". If you give them 10 for free, that's fairly hard to beat by rolling for it actively.

                          With a 1d20 there's an equal chance of rolling a 6, 10 or well any number, but with 3d6 this is not the case. The main difference with D&D is that in FAGE we use a bell curve as opposed to a lineair curve so any 'free' amount you add to the ability test has more impact in FAGE than it would have in D&D.
                          The thing is, 10 is also the average Difficulty Class in D&D 5E. This is the basis for the "Take 10" - it stands for average effort in non-stressful circumstances. Nothing spectacular, nothing particularly bad.

                          Passive Perception is not meant to be the singular determinant of sensing something without an active test. Just like most of the other rules mechanics in RPGs, it'd have to mesh with some creativity and common sense to make... sense. ^_^

                          I go back to my secret door example. A TN 12 is just slightly above average, easily within reach of someone with a small investment in Perception. But a Passive Perception won't trigger if nobody walks close enough to it, so the magnitude of the Passive Perception score won't matter.

                          Of course, if someone actively performs a Perception test, it's fair game to sense the door, whether she walks right by it or not, so long as there is an unbroken line of effect.




                          I just wanted to add that I'm not against a lower base for Passive Perception. It's just that I like working with the median on this particular mechanic so I'm biased towards 10 (median of 3d6) or 9 (combined medians of each 1d6). It's worked for me thus far, but YRMV.
                          Last edited by TheGreyWulf; 18th January 2016, 03:28 AM. Reason: Clarification

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                            Originally posted by TheGreyWulf View Post
                            But a Passive Perception won't trigger if nobody walks close enough to it.
                            Good point, this sentence above pretty much changes it entirely, for the good that is. I hadn't thought of it that way, I thought of it more like: You are in a room and you have passive perception or you can actively look. But if your passive would almost always be higher than rolling then why would you ever need to roll?
                            But if you don't 'trigger' passive perception unless the GM decides enough requirements have been met, such as walking nearby or glancing in that general area. With that in mind it's a bit more logical to suddenly notice things just as well as you would while searching actively.

                            I just wanted to add that I'm not against a lower base for Passive Perception. It's just that I like working with the median on this particular mechanic so I'm biased towards 10 (median of 3d6) or 9 (combined medians of each 1d6). It's worked for me thus far, but YRMV.
                            With the above 'requirements' I can see this working just fine. The only times it might get 'awkward' is, when you passively start passing tests that are near impossible. But then again, as a GM you could simply choose to not use passive perception for those.

                            On a quick sidenote: If you compare at dice roll results of 1d20 vs 3d6 and look at the chance of passing a test (e.g. a TN of 10 would mean rolling a 10 or higher) the results 'meet' at TN 11 where there is a 50% chance to pass. Any TN below 11 will pass more easily with 3d6 whereas every TN above 11 will be more difficult with 3d6 compared to 1d20.
                            Some quick numbers:
                            TN 3d6 1d20
                            5 98,15% 80%
                            7 90,74% 70%
                            11 50% 50%
                            13 25,93% 40%
                            15 9,26% 30%

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                              While I was originally in favor of base 10, I think base 6 might be the way to go, depending on how successful you want passive awareness to be. Base 10+ PER 2 + Focus is going to be successful about 85% of the time, whereas base 6 would be about 50% of the time. So is your goal attempting to replicate something like the old "Secret Doors" check - a 1 on a d6, or something more lenient?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Notice: a new mechanic from D&D 5e

                                Originally posted by shonuff View Post
                                While I was originally in favor of base 10, I think base 6 might be the way to go, depending on how successful you want passive awareness to be. Base 10+ PER 2 + Focus is going to be successful about 85% of the time, whereas base 6 would be about 50% of the time. So is your goal attempting to replicate something like the old "Secret Doors" check - a 1 on a d6, or something more lenient?
                                I myself like to use 8+PER+Focuses as it gives a little more leeway for The Obvious "Oh,Look!Someone Dropped a Gold Piece on the Ground!"
                                At the Least(With the Way GREED-E makes their Characters) I'm looking at a Base of 10 normally,and that's from the Tank Warrior of the Bunch...
                                Originally posted by Bladewind
                                Lightsabers don`t kill people. People wielding lightsabers kill people.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X