POLL: Too random?
459 votes were cast.
Back to POLLS home page
Angel Barracks  writes: |
Quite possibly so but dice used is not always a problem in itself. Let us assume a situation that should spell defeat for unit A is diced for.
Unit A rolls 2d6 and adds -1
Unit B rolls 2d6 and adds + 5 That could quite easily result in Unit A winning despite the situation being almost un-win-able. (lost my grammar skills there) My main "beef" if you will is with systems that allow sure defeats to become possible defeats due to the modifiers used with the dice in question.
Had the same modifiers with the 2d6 been -1 and +8, then fair enough, Unit A is almost destined to lose as the situation demands. It is this randomness in almost certain situations that has irked me and I wondered what others felt about it. |
Back to the Homepage
|
If you were a member of this website, you could participate in website polls. Would you like a free membership?
| VOTING RESULTS |
| Answer | Votes | % | Chart |
almost certain | 65 | 14% |  |
|---|
somewhere in the middle | 345 | 75% | |
|---|
no preference | 21 | 5% | |
|---|
totally random | 11 | 2% | |
|---|
no opinion | 17 | 4% | |
|---|
| POLL DESCRIPTION |
Angel Barracks wonders...
How much randomness in games do you like?
By that I mean, how much variance in your dice rolls is acceptable.
Here is an example of what I am babbling about:
An elite unit attacks a raw unit of the same size in melee on the flank.
The elite gets +3 to its roll and the raw gets -1
The highest wins.
I am happy with this if the roll is a D6, that way the elite are almost certain of a win, which given the situation they should be.
It is a safe bet to assume the raw will not win.
Now if this roll was a D8 then the raw would be more likely to win than with a D6 roll.
On a D10, they could quite easily win.
On a D20, it is anyone's guess.
How random do you like your results?
I like games where getting the right men in the place at the right time makes victory almost certain.
In the example above, if the player of the elite unit has managed to outflank a weaker enemy, then I believe the rules should reflect his tabletop skill and give him the advantage - which, with the D6 scenario, they would.
I see it as taking advantage of the rules and knowing how to play them well.
(Much like in real life where commanders take advantage of the rules of the real world, physics and what not.)
If you know how the world works (real or imaginary), then you should be rewarded for knowing how to take advantage of that.
I think that in the D20 scenario, the skill of the players would count for nothing as any troop type would be able to defeat any other troop type, and this would make for a dull game based almost entirely on luck.
Along the same lines, two equal units facing off in a fair fight should, I think, have an equal chance of winning.
It is the player's job to make the fight as unfair as possible in his own favor to ensure victory.
How do you like your games - totally random, almost certain, or somewhere in the middle? |
|
