Miss Chance Adjudication

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

After over a decade of playing together my gaming group had to disband.
So, I've found a new one. It's an eye opening experience for me as
there are many things that this new group does differently.

One of these differences is the way they adjudicate miss chance. It is
not house-ruled. They simply interpret the rules differently than my
previous group. So, I put it before you all.

How do you adjudicate miss chance? I'll give an example:

(From the SRD: Concealment Miss Chance: Concealment gives the subject
of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of
the concealment. If the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss
chance percentile roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment
conditions do not stack.)

Defender has concealment, giving him 20% miss chance.
Attacker attacks Defender. His to hit roll beats Defender's AC.
Defender then rolls a d%.

Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a miss?

One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss

Is one of these officially correct?

Thanks.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rob, no need to get insulting. It's merely a question. I didn't say I
argued it. The whole group is interested in knowing if there's an
*official* way of adjudicating it. We didn't let it stop our play.

Sheesh...why do people so often resort to insults to simple questions
of interest?

Back to the topic...

It appears from both your answers that the answer to my question is
that there is no *official*. That's all I needed to know.

Thanks.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 25 Apr 2005 07:23:59 -0700, rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com wrote:


>
>Is one of these officially correct?
>
" If the result equals or exceeds the target number, your character
succeeds. If the result is lower than the target number, you fail. "

From SRD, I would interpert this to mean you need to get better then
20, that being target you are trying to best.

--
news:alt.pagan FAQ at http://www.dmcom.net/bard/altpag.txt
news:alt.religion.wicca FAQ at http://www.dmcom.net/bard/arwfaq2.txt
news:news.groups FAQ at http://www.dmcom.net/bard/ngfaq.txt
Want a new group FAQs http://web.presby.edu/~nnqadmin/nnq/ncreate.html

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:23:59 GMT, scrawled:

> Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a miss?
>
> One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
> Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>
> Is one of these officially correct?
>
> Thanks.

As Rob said, they're exactly the same probability wise. The only
difference being that the former method is easier to read directly and
that the latter will at some point require some simple math.

--
http://www.rexx.co.uk

To email me, visit the site.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Alien mind control rays made rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com write:
> One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
> Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>
> Is one of these officially correct?

....

.. . .

.. . .

! ! !

*kapow*

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/>
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: Form follows malfunction.
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Chad Lubrecht wrote:
> On 25 Apr 2005 07:23:59 -0700, rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com wrote:
> >Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a
miss?
> >
> >One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
> >Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
> >
> >Is one of these officially correct?
>
> It doesn't matter either way. As long as
> you and your group pick one method and use that
> (no rolling and then deciding which one to use afterward)
> To add more confusion, since all the miss chances are multiples of
10,
> you can just roll a single die. 1-2 miss, 3-0 hit.

We just use the d20. 1-4 miss, 5-20 hit. Speeds up play, since the
attacker doesn't have to go scrabble for a different die; he can use
the d20 he rolled his attack with.

Laszlo
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 07:23:59 -0700, rpgdudenyc wrote:

> One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
> Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>
> Is one of these officially correct?

Given that these are functionally identical, who cares? Get out of lawyer
mode already.

Rob
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com wrote:
> One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
> Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>
> Is one of these officially correct?

Any method that results in a 20% miss chance is equally correct. For
example, my group rolls a d10; a roll of 1 or 2 is a miss.

IIRC, the PHB explains how to do it using the "1 to 20 on d%" method,
but that doesn't make it more "officially correct" than any other
equivalent method. So long as nobody's mixing up methods in order to
cheat, it really doesn't matter.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> Chad Lubrecht wrote:
>
>>On 25 Apr 2005 07:23:59 -0700, rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a
>
> miss?
>
>>>One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
>>>Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>>>
>>>Is one of these officially correct?
>>
>>It doesn't matter either way. As long as
>>you and your group pick one method and use that
>>(no rolling and then deciding which one to use afterward)
>>To add more confusion, since all the miss chances are multiples of
>
> 10,
>
>>you can just roll a single die. 1-2 miss, 3-0 hit.
>
>
> We just use the d20. 1-4 miss, 5-20 hit. Speeds up play, since the
> attacker doesn't have to go scrabble for a different die; he can use
> the d20 he rolled his attack with.

I myself am in the habit of rolling the miss chance along with the
attack roll. So I have a different die at hand already. 🙂

-Tialan
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 25 Apr 2005 07:23:59 -0700, rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com wrote:
>Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a miss?
>
>One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
>Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>
>Is one of these officially correct?

It doesn't matter either way. As long as
you and your group pick one method and use that
(no rolling and then deciding which one to use afterward)
To add more confusion, since all the miss chances are multiples of 10,
you can just roll a single die. 1-2 miss, 3-0 hit.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rexx Magnus wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:23:59 GMT, scrawled:
>
>
>>Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a miss?
>>
>>One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
>>Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>>
>>Is one of these officially correct?
>>
>>Thanks.
>
> As Rob said, they're exactly the same probability wise. The only
> difference being that the former method is easier to read directly and
> that the latter will at some point require some simple math.

Annoyingly some monster entry listed a summoning chance as
something like "on a roll of 76 to 100".

I'd lean towards _officially_ that high numbers are "good",
"success", etc.

But, yeah, mathematically, both are nigh identical, and
conceptually, low numbers for X% chance are easier to grasp.

OTOH, we still haven't resolved local battles over how to
roll stabilizing checks. 1 in 10 succeed.
Many of us declare success on a 1, others on a 0 (or 10).
Some think people using the opposite method are lying.
Oh well...
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:

>
> We just use the d20. 1-4 miss, 5-20 hit. Speeds up play, since the
> attacker doesn't have to go scrabble for a different die; he can use
> the d20 he rolled his attack with.

We usually use the d10 so it's clear which die was which.
conversion by /10 is a bit easier than /5.
Not that either is difficult.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

RPGDudeNYC wrote:
> Rob, no need to get insulting. It's merely a question. I didn't say
> I argued it. The whole group is interested in knowing if there's an
> *official* way of adjudicating it. We didn't let it stop our play.
>
> Sheesh...why do people so often resort to insults to simple questions
> of interest?
>
> Back to the topic...
>
> It appears from both your answers that the answer to my question is
> that there is no *official*. That's all I needed to know.
>
> Thanks.

One thing to consider is that, in general, d20 applies a "higher rolls are
good, lower rolls are bad" philosophy. That being the case, since the rules
say the defender makes the miss-chance roll, it's sensible to stick with
"1-20 = hit, 21-100 = miss".

--
Mark.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Mark Blunden wrote:
> RPGDudeNYC wrote:
>
>>Rob, no need to get insulting. It's merely a question. I didn't say
>>I argued it. The whole group is interested in knowing if there's an
>>*official* way of adjudicating it. We didn't let it stop our play.
>>
>>Sheesh...why do people so often resort to insults to simple questions
>>of interest?
>>
>>Back to the topic...
>>
>>It appears from both your answers that the answer to my question is
>>that there is no *official*. That's all I needed to know.
>>
>>Thanks.
>
>
> One thing to consider is that, in general, d20 applies a "higher rolls are
> good, lower rolls are bad" philosophy. That being the case, since the rules
> say the defender makes the miss-chance roll, it's sensible to stick with
> "1-20 = hit, 21-100 = miss".
>

Doesn't that make it an 80% miss chance?

-Tialan
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 23:38:28 -0400, Ophidian <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net>
wrote:

>OTOH, we still haven't resolved local battles over how to
>roll stabilizing checks. 1 in 10 succeed.
>Many of us declare success on a 1, others on a 0 (or 10).
>Some think people using the opposite method are lying.
>Oh well...

I always have a 3 be a successfull stabilize. Ooops, I mean 8.
or 7...
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Tialan wrote:
> Mark Blunden wrote:
>> RPGDudeNYC wrote:
>>
>>> Rob, no need to get insulting. It's merely a question. I didn't
>>> say I argued it. The whole group is interested in knowing if
>>> there's an *official* way of adjudicating it. We didn't let it
>>> stop our play.
>>>
>>> Sheesh...why do people so often resort to insults to simple
>>> questions of interest?
>>>
>>> Back to the topic...
>>>
>>> It appears from both your answers that the answer to my question is
>>> that there is no *official*. That's all I needed to know.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> One thing to consider is that, in general, d20 applies a "higher
>> rolls are good, lower rolls are bad" philosophy. That being the
>> case, since the rules say the defender makes the miss-chance roll,
>> it's sensible to stick with "1-20 = hit, 21-100 = miss".
>>
>
> Doesn't that make it an 80% miss chance?

<Kicks self>

--
Mark.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> Chad Lubrecht wrote:
>
>>On 25 Apr 2005 07:23:59 -0700, rpgdudenyc@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a
>
> miss?
>
>>>One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit
>>>Other group says 1-80=hit 81-100=miss
>>>
>>>Is one of these officially correct?
>>
>>It doesn't matter either way. As long as
>>you and your group pick one method and use that
>>(no rolling and then deciding which one to use afterward)
>>To add more confusion, since all the miss chances are multiples of
>
> 10,
>
>>you can just roll a single die. 1-2 miss, 3-0 hit.
>
>
> We just use the d20. 1-4 miss, 5-20 hit. Speeds up play, since the
> attacker doesn't have to go scrabble for a different die; he can use
> the d20 he rolled his attack with.
>
> Laszlo
>

Or a different colored d20 rolled at the same time. If that comes up
1-4, it doesn't matter what the other one says.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 08:00:54 -0700, RPGDudeNYC wrote:

> Rob, no need to get insulting. It's merely a question. I didn't say I
> argued it. The whole group is interested in knowing if there's an
> *official* way of adjudicating it. We didn't let it stop our play.
>
> Sheesh...why do people so often resort to insults to simple questions
> of interest?

I may have misinterpreted your original post. I got the distinct
impression from that, that this issue (and similar ones) actually had some
real significance, beyond the obvious adjustment to the local modus
operandi, and that the strict letter of the rules/law was somehow
important. Although I can appreciate that particular mindset in wargaming,
in RPGS I find it terribly irritating, and a clear sign of excessive
ruleslawyering.

If I was wrong, and you were merely interested in a bit of D&D trivia, I
humbly apologise.

Rob
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In <Xns96439FAFBA323rexxdeansaund@130.133.1.4> (4/25/05 10:41 AM) Rexx
Magnus wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:23:59 GMT, scrawled:
>
>> Which d% results actually constitute a hit and which constitute a
>> miss? One group says 1-20=miss 21-100=hit Other group says 1-80=hit
>> 81-100=miss Is one of these officially correct? Thanks.
>
> As Rob said, they're exactly the same probability wise. The only
> difference being that the former method is easier to read directly and
> that the latter will at some point require some simple math.
>
I have the player pick any two numbers on a d10,
then roll the d10, and if they come up - miss! For
NPCs I just use 1 and 2 as misses. As long as it is
20% likely to happen, it doesn't matter.

For 50% you could flip a coin, roll a d6, or roll d%.
It really, really, doesn'rt matter. Really. 😉

ROB
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rob van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 08:00:54 -0700, RPGDudeNYC wrote:
>
>
>>Rob, no need to get insulting. It's merely a question. I didn't say I
>>argued it. The whole group is interested in knowing if there's an
>>*official* way of adjudicating it. We didn't let it stop our play.
>>
>>Sheesh...why do people so often resort to insults to simple questions
>>of interest?
>
>
> I may have misinterpreted your original post. I got the distinct
> impression from that, that this issue (and similar ones) actually had some
> real significance, beyond the obvious adjustment to the local modus
> operandi, and that the strict letter of the rules/law was somehow
> important. Although I can appreciate that particular mindset in wargaming,
> in RPGS I find it terribly irritating, and a clear sign of excessive
> ruleslawyering.
>
> If I was wrong, and you were merely interested in a bit of D&D trivia, I
> humbly apologise.
>
> Rob
>

So shines a good deed in a weary world.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Yes, differences in rules interpretations are not affecting our game
play at all. We're just finding it interesting that it's possible to
have played for so long with different understandings of the same
rules. So, out of curiosity we wanted to see how others interpreted
them and/or if there were "official" interpretations. Merely to
satisfy our curiosity.

Thanks for the apology, Rob. Much appreciated.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Thanks to everyone that replied. I can see that the methods of dealing
with this are even more varied than we had expected. From my
perspective, it's rather fun to play differently than I've been used
to. 🙂

Thanks again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom