How do you feel about roll-under systems, tg?
I know dice mechanic means nothing by itself, but I am curious.
Like in GURPS: roll under your attack skill to hit, defender must roll under their attack skill to block. It's great for drawn-out duels, especially in a bellcurve system like GURPS where results are pretty predictable, so a fight between two swordsmen can last a long time.
What about a 2d6 roll-under system, kinda like Traveller?
I think roll-under is inherently counter-intuitive but it can work just fine if you're used to it.
The real problem is mixing roll-under and roll-over in the same system. That shit can just fuck right off forever.
Works about just as well as roll-over systems. I'm alright with either, even though roll-under takes a little getting used to if you've been conditioned with "higher numbers=good" from other games.
>>43839870
>I think roll-under is inherently counter-intuitive
Not really? I mean, "Here is your skill level, this is how good you are at it. Are you good enough to beat random chance"
Roll Under = The Dice is the DC
>>43840823
Also, I agree mixing the two can fuck right off forever.
Roll under makes it harder to obscure results from your players when necessary and problem players more likely to bitch when things don't go as they expected.
>>43839850
To me, it's fine. Takes some getting used to, because you roll three sixes and your first instinct is "yahoo!", before you remember what you're playing and switch to "oh fuck".
Other than that, no difference. I appreciate only having to carry three dice around.
>>43840844
Yes yes yes.
I wish GURPS would get rid of this for Reaction rolls.
>>43840823
How is roll under effectively any different from roll over? Is there some mechanic I'm missing?
>>43842188
You're missing the part in your brain that makes you a retarded mong.
Welcome to the elite, Anon.
>>43840889
That's what modifiers are for, and hidden rolls.
>>43841443
>I wish GURPS would get rid of this for Reaction rolls.
Or do them differently. I mean it kinda makes sense. Roll Versus skill is roll under, everything else is roll higher.
Maybe players roll under, and their margin of success or failure is the modifier on the GM's roll on the table?
>>43842188
>How is roll under effectively any different from roll over? Is there some mechanic I'm missing?
Two Major Differences:
Essentially, in most roll over systems the/a Modifier is the dice roll.
D&D: is (Skill+Y)+Roll >= DC
That's a different equation each time, because the roll changes. GURPS (don't know about other roll under systems off the top of my head cold) is a binary check of (Skill+Y) <= Roll
Y being a standard modifier that is unlikely to change, such as fighting in the dark or having a +2 equipment bonus.
With Roll Overs there's usually at least one more number involved.
Second thing is that Roll Unders, in my experience, seem more tied to realative levels rather than absolute.
Skills go up, so the same modifier (Y) starts counting for less and less, and the DC has to go up as well.
Something tricky in Roll Unders will tend to remain -3 to your skill level.
Meanwhile in Roll Overs, something tricky back when you first start is DC 17, and when you're more advanced, it's DC 25
>>43842188
Roll over means that you want a low target number or a bunch of modifiers that you add to the roll.
Roll under means that you want a high target number and perhaps a bunch of modifiers that you either subtract from the roll or add to the target number, depending on system.
Using a "roll under your skill" system, that means that a high skill is good and you want bonuses that make the number go up.
In some cases it's also easier to math out - d100-roll-under, for instance.
There's not really any big inherent mathematical difference between the two systems, but there's a "feel" thing with having large target numbers be good vs. large modifiers.
