Why don't I see anyone use 2d10 in their RPG systems?Despite its physical form being aesthetically unpleasing, it's a perfect physical RNG. There's a bell curve, AND each number has a whole number percentage chance of being rolled. And Nat 2s and Nat 20s each have 1% chance of being rolled.But no one uses it.Why???
>>98350928A bell curve probably isn't ideal for most games, and a flat linear system is better.2d10 is a shoddy solution in search of a non-existent problem.
>>98350928That's not a bell curve, that's a pyramid. You'd need 3d10 for that.Also, if you're rolling 2d10, you might as well just roll percentile because it's faster (no addition), provides instant (percentile) odds, and also gives much more granular odds if desired, which is probably why there's many games that use percentile but few use 2d10.
>>983510093d10 is too flat of a bell curve. It's like a B-cup at best.3d8 is a much bustier bell-curve, and anything bustier is automatically better.
>>98350928I don't have an answer, I just like that people still use anydice.comI learned about it from /tg/ and it's fucking perfect for doing dice-odds maths.
>>98350928>yBecause they likely have no use for it.Why don't you make a game using it, since you like it so much?
>>98350928Simple if someone wants a large but reliable shape, they typically go for 3d6 if they want a higher variance they typically go for 1d20, 2d10 is a middle ground that pleases neither crowd.
>>98351031So 3d4 is the best (when using normal dice)?
>>98351538It's not a particularly appealing shape.
>>98350928I did it for a fighter pilot system. I found myself a little limited in usable granularity to allow players to distinguish both pilot skill and aircraft characteristics.
>>98350928I did, but it was an alternative to d20. As in players could pick either. Nat 1 (impossible on 2d10) landed an actual critical failure, nat 20 a critical Hit. People favored 2d10 until needing about a Natural 15, in which case they became a bit reckless and took the d20.It was fun.Did require to overhaul the entire fucking Star Wars Saga system around it, but it was fun.
>>98350928Barbarians of Lemuria and Honor + Intrigue have 2d10 as an alternative option for longer campaigns. I like them, they're fun. The only thing that's a little off for me is that I feel like true crits should happen more often in the above systems. But they're really really satisfying and feel perfectly "balanced". I understand the appeal for percentile/d100 but... it always felt weird for me that most of the time only one of the die faces mattered.
>>98350928How dare you post about games on /tg/-worldbuilding and ai elf art? This is not a place for this kind of low brow knuckle dragging. Dice? Those just come in the way for story writing. Begone you gameist troll.
>>98352037i hated the 2d10 so much than when i wanted to try expanded honour and intrigue i made it 3d6 instead
>>98350928You don't see it because everyone capable of making games doesn't want to revolve mechanics around it.Too bad, I guess there's no way for you to ever get one.
>>98350928>And Nat 2s and Nat 20s each have 1% chance of being rolled.I want my crits to happen more often.
>>98350928Distinct results that are not infinite and exponential can't form a bell curve. Calling anything vaguely bell shaped a bell curve shows you have absolutely no understanding of probability and you should hit the books before trying discussing it.
There is a game that uses 2d10 but we don't talk about it because the creator's a dickhead
>>98350928draw steel is probably the most notable game that came out recently and uses 2d10>2d10 + characteristic modifier + relevant bonuses>3 tiers of success>tier 1 result under 11>tier 2 result between 12 and16>tier 3 result over 17
>>98350962>A bell curve probably isn't ideal for most gamesyou have dnd brain mayhaps?I would say bell curves are pretty dang popular. 2d6, 3d6, and dice pools are pretty freaking standard dice resolution systems.
>>98353098Not OP, and I preface this with the fact that I'm normally in support of proper vocabulary/jargon, but rather than getting hung up on whether or not a certain distribution's angle qualifies as a "bell curve" is less important than discussing the utility of such.Not that I'm particularly interested in 2D10, but I feel it bears mention.
>>98350962Bellcurves seem the most popular outside of d20/d100 games
>>98354013that is dicepools anon
>>98350928My system better
>>98354107I don't have any experience with dicepools, what are the best examples of dicepool games?
>>98353920Can't discuss utility if you don't understand the basics.Example:>>98353870None of the things this ignoramus describes are bell curves. He throws dice pools in there for a good measure as well.
>>98350928My game already has a bell curveI don't care about individual result probabilities being integers (?)There's no such thing as nat 1 ot nat 202d10 doesn't support my resolution mechanicSo why would I use this method that doesn't do what I want instead of the one that does?
>>98354147You do understand the basics, though, so why not offer your thoughts on the utility?
>>98354143white wolf games like vampire and exalted
I was going to make a 2d10 game but ended up switching to a d6 pool because it suited the mechanics better.But I'm with you OP, don't understand why theres so few 2d10 games. In my opinion 2d10 is generally better than 3d6 in pretty much every aspect, from odds to granularity and even speed of play.
>>98354167>There's no such thing as nat 1 ot nat 20So?
>>98354143>shadowrun/exalted/vampire/sciondice pool systems where the result of each die produces a hit by passing a set threshold. you count hits and the difficulty is set by a target number of hits. should be a binomial distribution i think>opend6/star wars/mini sixa class of game all originating from a star wars game by west end i think. you sum the numbers and the difficulty thresholds got set. i think it is a multinomial distribution.then there is stuff like blades in the dark which is a narrative dicepool, and some other narrative games that use 2d6 with different scales of success imprinted on each number of the dice, genesys and fate which are narrative games that use symbol dice with completely different meaning
>>98350962they are ideal for any games where margin of success and failure are relevantwhich should be pretty much almost all non shit games put there
>>98354147how are 2d6 and 3d6 not bell curves?>>98354107>dice poolmaybe thats a misnomer, but I was thinking shit like d6 system where you roll a number of dice and sum them up. But even dice pools as in roll a number of dice and dice above a certain number count as successes, the number of successes result in a bell curve distribution, as compared to the uniform distribution of a single die.
>>98354255bell curves belong to normal distributions. normal distributions are continuous distributions, while XdY produces discrete distributions, where the underlying sample space is a countable set. meanwhile for normal distributions it is the real numbers and therefore uncountable.
>not using the superior version
>>98354255>how are 2d6 and 3d6 not bell curves?Distinct results that are not infinite and exponential can't form a bell curve. If you would like something that actually is approximating a bell curve you would need something like 30d20.
>>983542912d(0-9)+coinflip vs 2d(0-5)+1d10 is trully the khabib vs mcgregor (nonflushed) of our times
>>98354283>>98354315idk if you are getting into some kind of specific technicalities but when there is a central average and the further away you get from that the less likely the outcome is, thats what I think most people refer to a bell curve. Its used for money and stuff I believe and that is not infinite or continuous, those are discrete. Maybe there is a more proper term for discrete shit, but I think we know what we are referring too.
>>98354247>which should be pretty much almost all non shit games put thereWhy? If I miss you with a sword why do degrees of failure matter unless you want some wacky hijinks like my sword to go flying in a random direction? What does a lockpicking attempt with 3 degrees of success look like? If I fail to sneak why should I care that I failed by 3 degrees?
>>98354588> thats what I think most people refer to a bell curveThen most people are objectively wrong. >Maybe there is a more proper term for discrete shitYes there is. It's called a discrete triangular distribution. Or a bell-shaped distribution.>but I think we know what we are referring too.No. Sorry. I don't speak public American education. The term bell curve, when discussing probabilities, describes a very specific thing with very specific properties. Using it to refer to something else that vaguely looks like it if you have myopia shows ignorance and a lack of understanding of the very basics you want to engage with.
>>98350928Because the bellcurve produced by rolling 2d6, 3d6 and 4d6 is sexually arousing to me, and most people have d6's lying around in their house, even if they're not tabletop players
>local game designer so afraid of random number generators generating random numbers that they need bell curves so they can keep those scary highs and lows away.
>>98354802Yes because it's easier to sell "You lose your arm" to a player if the chance it happens is lower than 5% and it allows you to make ranges within your results.
>>98354703using your examples and assuming a 2d10 distribution of results:failing to sneak by 1 could mean just slightly stepping on a stick and the guard being mildly suspicious, while failing by 10 could mean you dropping a bucket linked to a chain linked to a skeleton down a well that goes all the way through the orc baselockpicking with lots of extra success could mean you figured the lock pattern and doesnt need to roll more tests in the dungeon, or you do it fast enough to rejoin a fight sooner, etcmissing by a lot could mean a -2 modifier to your next turn since you whiff it hard and lose your balanceits a lot of fun and its more bang for your buck in terms of emergent narrative possibilities per roll
>>98354754>No its not bell curved>Its bell-shapedok.The FP I originally responded to seemed to be referring to bell curve in the sense of what 2d10 is though too, contrasting it to "a flat linear system", so that is the meaning I am talking about. If you are a statistician who has a more refined term vocabulary, good for you, but I am talking in the sense of what OP and FP obviously meant given the thread topic of common dice resolution systems.
>>98354886most one die or % games just have critical failure, failure, success and critical success, which is fine if you want to have a quicker and simpler game, but imo it gets boring and at the same time very annoying fast that almost all your results are a generic success or the best/worst thing possible
>>98354908>ok.Yes. Words have meaning. Who knew?>The FP I originally responded to seemed to be referring to bell curve in the sense of what 2d10 is though tooNot a bell curve.>contrasting it to "a flat linear system", so that is the meaning I am talking aboutYour are objectively wrong. > If you are a statisticianNormal distributions is statistics 101.>but I am talking in the sense of what OP and FP obviously meant given the thread topic of common dice resolution systems.And that was my original point. You lack the very fundamentals of probability to have any useful discussion about it.
>>98355005ok then I misinterpreted your post, sorry. But still, it is obvious what OP meant by bell curve isnt it given he is talking about 2d10. It seems likes you are being willfully "erm-akshually"-ing.
>>98355312Sure. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
>>98354174He can't, so don't bother asking.
>>98353870>it's good because it's popular shouldn't you worship d&d then retard
>>98355635the point moreso being that they are proven dice mechanics, not some one off niche experiments.
>>98350928I use them in a few of mine. As I said a while back in another thread, 2d10 is better if you want rolls to tend towards the average. 1d20 is better if you want more randomness.I much prefer rolls tend towards the average. Easier to design around, easier to balance around, just all-around the better die from a game design perspective IMO.D20s have the problem of being completely random. You have a flat 5% chance to hit literally anything within the range of the roll, which will lead to what I can best describe as a bad game feel for all involved. Just play D&D to see this in action; you can have a character who's rolling an attack with a +7 to hit and against a foe with an AC of 15 and they still have roughly a 1 in 3 chance to miss.The same roll using 2d10 would reduce the miss chance from 35% to 21% - a 14% decrease, which means the same attack with the same modifier has a 14% better chance to hi, or about 1 in 5 odds to miss.
>>98351009Percentages are harder to work with than addition and subtraction, resulting to overall slower math at the table. They also practically demand roll-under, which is an awkward mechanic to use. 2d10 + modifier is quick to resolve and easy to math out on the fly.
>>98354917I'm of the opposite opinion, a system where you have more than Success/Fail or Crit success/crit fail tends to be too complicated and a pain to GM for. The more possible outcomes, the more the GM has to prepare, usually on the fly, whenever anyone rolls anything. Keep it simple, stupid; a game design philosophy that proves more true with every passing thread.
>Put out a deck of playing cards, discard all the face cards, jokers, jacks, kings, queens, etc, only have numbers A-10>draw 2 random cards each roll and add them together. Then discard them for later use when reshuffling>reshuffle the deck once it runs outthere you go, aesthetically pleasing 2d10.
>>98355708>not having a five suit deck with 1-10+Ace, Jack, Princess, Queen, King and 3 Jokers. Plebian.
>>98355674>you have a 55% chance of failure. Roll 56 or higher to succeed.>you have a 7% chance of failure. Roll 8 or above to succeed.I dunno. That's about as clean and direct as it can be.
>>98350928>Despite its physical form being aesthetically unpleasingThis matters more than you think.> it's a perfect physical RNG. As far as any physical dice can by a perfect rng, sure.>There's a bell curveNo, there is not.>each number has a whole number percentage chance of being rolled. d20 also has that. Not that the decimal portion matters at all in the actual table. >And Nat 2s and Nat 20s each have 1% chance of being rolled.Utterly meaningless. Any doubles in 2d10 have 1% chance of being rolled.>But no one uses it.Why???Probably because they feel bad to use.Beyond that xdy rngs are there, mostly, to fix a non-problem that stems from people not understanding probability.>I have +10 on my roll, that means that it should be near impossible to miss!On a d20 with a TN of 19 roll equal or over you still have a whooping 40% chance to fail on 2d10 the chance of failure is 28%. Approx the same result if your bonus in the d20 is +12. The core is people "feeling" that +10 should matter more. If they are satisfied with the 2d10 system it should matter approx +2 more. It's like the memes with the X-Com remake where you may have 95% chance to hit and you miss. You feel like 95% chance should be a guaranteed hit but the probability to miss is right there. It's 5 percent. It's just for the human brain that may translate to near 0. This was an actual issue for that game because combat was highly tactical and punishing. Missing an attack could cost you soldiers(that have permadeath btw) or even the whole mission. You may see ttrpgs trying to mitigate that by having fewer or no real consequences for failure or having things happen on failure too. Another way to mitigate this as discussed above is using a smaller dice with bigger modifiers.
>>98350928What's the difference between 2d10 and d100?
>>983509282d6+1d10-2 is far superior
>>98355938...bro
>>98355819>Telling your players the difficulty of a check or saveThat aside, that's less straightforward than:>Roll one die and add the modifier on your sheet, GM compares it to the value for success (potentially critical success and critical failure)Plus, I don't like how d100s play with math. The only system I've ever worked on that uses d100 roll-under is my Fallout system's 2e rework, and it's far more complicated than any of my other works by virtue of being d100 roll under.
>>98355871>Utterly meaningless. Any doubles in 2d10 have 1% chance of being rolled.It makes utter failure and utter success far less likely than on a d20.>On a d20 with a TN of 19 roll equal or over you still have a whooping 40% chance to fail on 2d10 the chance of failure is 28%. Incorrect. With no modifiers, your chance of success on a TN 19 roll for a d20 is 10%. On 2d10, it's 3%.However...>The core is people "feeling" that +10 should matter moreIt's entirely justified that your investments into your character's abilities should matter. If they don't matter that much, why bother with the investment at all?Let's look at that TN 19 check again, with a +10 modifier.You're looking at a 40% (40%! That's almost a coin toss!) chance of failure on a d20. On 2d10 however, that drops to 28%. Again, I explained the odds earlier ITT; for any roll with modifiers, on 1d20 you're looking at around 1 in 3 odds of failure, while with any roll on 2d10 you're looking around 1 in 5 odds of failure. Thus, your odds of success are objectively higher on 2d10 + Modifiers than they are on 1d20 + Modifiers.This means that, according to the math, modifiers are 12% less impactful on a d20. That doesn't sound like much, but you also need to factor in that you're more likely to hit the average roll on 2d10. by 9% in fact. I much prefer rolling average with the ability to stack modifiers to garuntee more success than leaving my outcomes up to the whims of chance by using a d20 with the same modifier system.Of course, you could use a higher modifier system with a d20 and get the same result, but that ends up with more system complexity because either you're using a 3.X style skill system where your skills are entirely divorced from your stats making stats less important (arguably unimportant), which can work but is unorthodox, or you can just use 2d10 with smaller modifiers for skills (or none at all with just stats) and solve the issue simply.
>>98355938D100 roll under will result in around 15% less success on average.
>>98350928Because you can take that same 2d10 and use them as percentile die.Which is granular as fuck my man.
>>98356406>telling your players the difficulty of a check or saveThe worst most railroady, petty and dishonest DMs think like this.
>>983509282d10 is the same thing as a d100.
>>98356517>NOOO THE PLAYERS HAVE TO KNOW THE DIFFICULTY OF EVERY SINGLE CHECKAnd I'm sure IRL you can account for every little thing that could happen while you're trying to do something that could make something more or less difficult, or for things that you had no way of knowing about.
>>98356619>Petty>Dishonest>RailroadI feel for you players, if you even have games to play.
>>98356614youre retarded
>>98356614no it isnt. d100 has an equal chance for every outcome, 2d10 has 11 as its most common outcome and each other outcome is increasingly less likely.
>>98354356>>98355969based>>98356619not a problem of you are playing with guys that are not braindead and can separate themselves from their characters and are not playing to win anything. I always tell my players the TN and what it means to pass or fail
>>98356619Nta but I play TTRGPs to play a game, to see where the rolls will take my character. If all you have for me is "trust me bro" then I'll just walk away after the first session. I don't want to sit there and have you tell me your unilateral gay-ass story, I'd rather read a book.
>>98355819Imagine letting your players roll anything and not doing it behind the dm screen.
>>98356970nta but some rolls are made to be hidden. if you dont trust your DM, then walk way no matter what. find a DM you trust.
>>98356931>not a problem of you are playing with guys that are not braindead and can separate themselves from their characters and are not playing to win anything.This is the truke. I started telling my players exactly what would happen on failure and exactly how likely it was when I tried Lancer (which requires that the GM do this, else the roll be in violation of the rules) and it made my players MORE willing to take dramatically interesting risks because they consented to the stakes. I do it in all my games now.
>>98354703The number of successes is the amount of damage dealt. Pretty straightforward.
>>98357302I think that a big part of the fun of RPGs is the gambling aspect and when you do nebulous tests the thrill gets dilluted for the players because they may not feel that the dice are actually going to decide anythingthey also start accepting bad rolls and using them to move the story forward in creative ways more frequently too
>>98354228So that's not an incentive to use OP's system. Obviously. Are you having difficulty following the conversation?
>>98356970>>98356900You aren't at my tables so you're irrelevant lol. Couple of nogames who don't understand what TTRPGs actually are. I feel bad for you really, you're so insufferable you've only ever played with insufferable faggots like yourselves, so of course you'd wind up with a petty, vindictive GM who makes the TN unbeatable then doesn't tell you shit.Unlike (you), however, I play games with and run games for my friends. Not a one of us as GM reveals TNs to the players until at best after the rolls are made and settled. It prevents the games from becoming boring slop where it's just a race to get bigger number instead of actually ROLEPLAYING in a ROLEPLAYING GAME and having your character act as they would were they a real person. But you're insufferable faggots, so of course you wouldn't know that.>>98357302I've had the opposite experience, you tell players how hard a check is and they cower away from it. You tell them nothing other than "Make this check" and they make it anyway and are all the more excited when they succeed and all the more devastated when they fail. It also stops the game from becoming a numbers simulator where it's all about getting THE BIGGEST MODIFIER EVER TO NEVER FAIL ANYTHING and becomes an emergent narrative, like TTRPGs are supposed to be.
>>98354754Usage is meaning, sorry.
>>98356619No? I just use the guidelines in the book. For most tasks, a threshold of 2 is fine. Challenging for ordinary untrained people, simple for anyone specialized. However, most challenge rolls are opposed rather than threshold rolls, so the rank is inherently public since the players can see the number of dice rolled.
>>98357270All rolls in the open unless my players request otherwise.
>>98357357lmao the irony
>>98357368Sounds like a dogshit system.
>>98357372No irony here, nogames. Just cold hard facts. Your math simulator will never be a real Roleplaying Game, just like you'll never be a real woman.
>>98357357If your players cower from a check when they know it's hard then your players suck lol. They want to win rather than tell an interesting story. I can't really relate to the modifiers problem, though I tend to play systems where there isn't much of that possible.
>>98350928Cyberpunk RED is de facto 2d10 much of the time, interestingly. Rolls against the environment are flat 1d10+X vs TN, but most combat and social rolls are opposed, 1d10+X vs 1d10+Y. This is in fact equivalent to 2d10+X vs 11+Y, which is somewhat annoying when I'm trying to eyeball odds of success in the system (without even getting into the extra dice rolled on nat 1s/10s).
>>98350928Single die makes it easier to determine chances, plus flat percentage makes more linear progression, which also makes easier estimation. Plus flat percentage makes for more frequent hype moments.
>>98350928>But no one uses it.The biggest ttrpg release since pf2e (Draw Steel) uses it.
