From the mouths of babes and innocents

[Triumvir]

Enough friends and acquaintances of the wife's have disclosed an interest in RPGs (independent of me) that she finally sat me down for a discussion of WTF they are. We had to go right back to the fact it isn't wargaming (which she knows about), "there isn't necessarily a board", and "nobody wins except in the sense you win if you had fun".

I remembered the play example in CoC ("I'm shooting at its face! Help! Help!") and dug it out for her to read, which helped a lot.

Except that she was flummoxed by the idea that you had to roll under your skill. "Isn't rolling higher always better?" She seemed genuinely quite annoyed by the idea of roll-under.

I was kind of astonished at how she went from ground zero to immediately taking a very strong position on one of the oldest design debates going. I don't care one way or the other so long as a game is well-designed, and I certainly like BRP/CoC etc. But roll-under clearly does not work for the way some people's brains are put together.

 

[bleys21]

I'm also one of those people, and I've been playing these games since 1978. Roll under systems always seem *wrong* to me? Its not that I can't make them work, but my brain goes, "This doesn't make any sense, shouldn't we be flipping this around?"

 

[Voros]

In a percentage-based system roll under makes perfect sense to me. How else could it work?

 

[bleys21]

In a percentage-based system roll under makes perfect sense to me. How else could it work?

Sure...or you could use Rolemaster!

(I'm joking...I'd never play Rolemaster lol)

(And yes, BRB/Coc does make logical sense...but as noted, it still seems wrong to try and roll low... as Yngwie said, "How can less be more? More is more!"

 

[DeadBob]

I suspect it's all in how you approach it.

Instead of saying " You need to roll under (some number)" you show them how d% works, then say something like:

" Okay, the chance that The Thing in Question occurs is 30%. What numbers on these dice would you use to determine if The Thing in Question happens?"

With that, chances are good that they'll answer, " Um 01 through 30, right?"

 

[Kage2020]

Rolling understand has always felt natural to me. It's like having a lemonade in an iced beverage container. The level of your lemonade represents your competence, such that the more lemonade that you put in the higher your competence. If something impacts your competence, you either turn the tap and let some lemonade out or can put some more lemonade in. This is the chance of your success. (Much the same as the percentile example.)

Of course, you could break out a high jump analogy for roll over, too, but the competence lemonade always worked for me.

 

[Parzival]

Never had an issue with it. In fact, sometimes I prefer it. It’s pretty straightforward and ties directly to an ability state. If a high stat is a better stat, then the only way to make the stat relevant is to either add it to a roll (which is clumsy) or try to roll equal to or lower than the stat (which is simple and easy, and immediately recognizable as success of failure).

 

[Acmegamer]

I'm also one of those people, and I've been playing these games since 1978. Roll under systems always seem *wrong* to me? Its not that I can't make them work, but my brain goes, "This doesn't make any sense, shouldn't we be flipping this around?"

Back in 1978 all of us were in RuneQuest 1e/2e class, you were asleep! Told ya it was gonna bite in the ass! Buuuut no! To this day you can't grok it! (flails about)

 

[bleys21]

Back in 1978 all of us were in RuneQuest 1e/2e class, you were asleep! Told ya it was gonna bite in the ass! Buuuut no! To this day you can't grok it! (flails about)

"Sorry Dad!"

In my defense, I never even *saw* a reference to Runequest where I lived (SoCal Desert) until I was probably somewhere between 25 and 30 years old. We had one tiny hobby store, then it went away for around 10 years, then another one opened, but they only had AD&D, Vampire and some Palladium stuff. The closest we got to seeing something from "across the pond" was getting a copy of the "When a Star Falls" adventure.

You may now proceed with my pummeling lol.

 

[Acmegamer]

"Sorry Dad!"

In my defense, I never even *saw* a reference to Runequest where I lived (SoCal Desert) until I was probably somewhere between 25 and 30 years old. We had one tiny hobby store, then it went away for around 10 years, then another one opened, but they only had AD&D, Vampire and some Palladium stuff. The closest we got to seeing something from "across the pond" was getting a copy of the "When a Star Falls" adventure.

You may now proceed with my pummeling lol.

Damn heathens out in Apple Valley, Victorville and Lancaster! Why my uncle on his ranch out in Lancaster was lucky to have running water and electricity!

On a serious note he actually had his own fuel pump on the ranch to fuel up all his kids (including those who married and had kids), it was easier than driving into town for fuel for all the cars, trucks and dirt bikes. I imagine that whole area is very developed these days. Heck, I bet they might even have a couple of game shops.

 

[bleys21]

Damn heathens out in Apple Valley, Victorville and Lancaster! Why my uncle on his ranch out in Lancaster was lucky to have running water and electricity!

On a serious note he actually had his own fuel pump on the ranch to fuel up all his kids (including those who married and had kids), it was easier than driving into town for fuel for all the cars, trucks and dirt bikes. I imagine that whole area is very developed these days. Heck, I bet they might even have a couple of game shops.

I don't know about Apple Valley or Victorville, but the one small game shop we had closed down during Covid, and now we have nothing

 

[Acmegamer]

I don't know about Apple Valley or Victorville, but the one small game shop we had closed down during Covid, and now we have nothing

Ugh. damn that sucks plus.

 

[Mankcam]

Roll Under with Percentile Dice makes perfect sense in the fact that you need to aim low if the Critical range is 01, or 10% of skill total, or whatever (eg: in Mythras a 43% Skill has a chance of Critical Success on rolls of 4 or under).

So it's quite logical for most BRP games and others to roll under on a percentile dice, aiming for the lowest number possible, because it is under the Skill Score and hoping to hit the Crit range.

In D100 games where Crits are achieved by rolling Doubles (under Skill score, as doubles over skill score are Fumbles), then it doesn't really matter whether its low or high, so if it seems counter-intutitive to roll low, you might as well tell them to "Aim high, but don't max out your score".

It's sort of the same thing (ie: rolling under score), except a different perspective, which has other benefits.

This makes it intuitive to determine who wins opposed rolls - highest roll wins, as long as no one maxs out their score.

It also makes it easy for games like WFRP 4E which has Success Levels expressed as SL Points - just use the 'tens' dice to determine what SL was achieved.

 

[Bunch]

"Sorry Dad!"

In my defense, I never even *saw* a reference to Runequest where I lived (SoCal Desert) until I was probably somewhere between 25 and 30 years old. We had one tiny hobby store, then it went away for around 10 years, then another one opened, but they only had AD&D, Vampire and some Palladium stuff. The closest we got to seeing something from "across the pond" was getting a copy of the "When a Star Falls" adventure.

You may now proceed with my pummeling lol.

This is the kind of education gap I can get behind fixing. Raise my property tax! Kids must learn the various RPG systems!