lets talk math and rpgs.

The original first wave of RPGs From DnD, Traveler and twilight 2000
used larger numbers and detailed formula much of the time. A design goal for many of these
games seemed to be how to let characters grow in a non linear manner to the roll of the dice.
Advanced DnD had attributes base on 3d6 and then used charts to determine hits and misses.
Twilight 2000 used formulae to generate a to hit formula based on percentile skilsl/attributes.
The james bond rpg took a skill range from 1 - 30 and then use a challenge system from 1/4 to x
10; so a 20 skill could be a percentile chance from 5 to 200. Again the disconnect from the
characters build and the resolution allows for growth in non linear directions, while still allowing
for a faster resolution. Rifts tried to do a percitile skills system, linked to d20 combat. A
narrative system using d100 skills then d20 combat to be faster. Then you have d6 systems West
End star wars used a link between Atributes but allowed for independant skill growth and used
a resolution system of adding d 6's.

The issue have have had for years is to have a growth system not limited by the resolution
system, like james bond or Star Wars D6. In these systems you could make a character with such
depth and still be a big damn hero. The reason 3.5 DnD had so much expansion in the numbers
and dice rolled ws that the additional feats, prestige classes, and other bonuses from spells
created truely powerful characters and Math to reinforce this. It was not non linear, it was in
direct line, to beat something DND moved away from THAC0 and to a straight to hit versus
Armor Class, The rules then scaled abilities and such so growth in skills matched with the
opposition and the numbers and power grew exponentially. Suddenly people could double or
triple the values to hit or roll 18 dice for damage.

So I always hated systems that limited the direction of my growth, but also linking the growth to
the resolution directly. That is the new way of RPG's... link the attribute/skill combat and that
directly to the resolution. Savage Worlds combines a roll of an attribute or a skill + the wild die
and does exploders. The scale grows as the rolls explode, you can hit 30 or 40 with a crazy good
roll and abilities.
Then yiou have the same system with special dice in genesys /EotE where the dice cancel. An
then there are blackjack systems where you have to get closer to the target to get more success.
All these systems limit growth to specific paths or only one or 2 upgrades per session.

So the question is ... Whats the problem with big math? is the a reason to let a player get a 150
skill and not a 15. Why roll a d100 and not a D10.
For example In the current system A character with the following stats: INT 50 (Con 70), PRS 60
(INS 40 ), END 40 (VIT 60) Skill Depth 4 and 6 influience. The Character has skills at levels
between 10 and 20. Lets say a detection s check using concentration is used. SKillSet 4 would
have INT 70, 3 15 skills for a base SkillSet of 115. Lets say the player goes for broke and spends 2
influence for +2 skill depth adding a past event and Subskill, SkillSet becomes a 135.
The Players Target is a 140, they have to roll a 5+ on 1d100. without spending influence the roll
would require a 25 +

Now we do the same thing with a d10 system A character with the following stats: INT 5 (Con
7), PRS 6 (INS 4 ), END 4 (VIT 6?) Skill Depth 4 and 6 influience. The Character has skills at levels
between 2 and 4. Lets say a detection s check using concentration is used. SKillSet 4 would have
CON 7, 3 Rank 3 skills for a base SkillSet of 16. Lets say the player goes for broke and spends 2
influence for +2 skill depth adding a past event and Subskill (2 each), SkillSet becomes a 20.
The Players Target is a 14, they have to roll a 1 + on 1d10. Without the influence the SkillSet is 16
with a target of 14. Again we see the lack of th range meas less fo chance for fails... So to make
such a system work we would have to double the Challenge values, a 14 would be a 28.
Meaning an 8+ is needed, maiking the fail more likely.

Another way is to build the skillset and generate a bonus. Then add it to 1d100 or 1d10. So say
every 25 is +5. so Example above (1d100) so a 115 would give a +20. Opposed is 140, so
influence would have tp be spent. Another idea is 10 adds 5, every 5 over 100 adds 5. A 115
would add 65, so a 30 is needed.
Another idea is 20 adds +5 until over 100, then every 1 over 100 adds 1. So a 115 is 25 (first 100)
+ 15 (the over 100) total bonus +40. So basically the system originally designed to change the
range, but just a bonus to 1d100. Lowers the math? or just a step to lower the big numbers?
Its just a big math step in the middle, like torg. Thats no option.

Another idea, Build SkillSet, Roll 1d100, under lowers Opposed EF Naahahaha

roll determines success or failure SkillSet V opposed sets successes?

Attribute v roll = Success or failure Mods for Attribute:
Mods -/+

SkillSet (skills and past events + mods) v Opposed sets successes: so SkillSet
above opposed Better success: +1 Influence Free additional Effect
Below Marginal success: declared Efect only

What all this math does disconnect the character gen from the system. Games like savage
worlds limit the build, because it directly breaks the challenge roll, rolling 2 d12 and a d6 makes
the odds of rolling 20+ pretty high which means more raises. Abilities would also skew the rolls.

Games like dragon age make the roll set a value 1-3 is a failure 4-7 success 9-11 great success 12
+ exceptional, and you add to the roll to make it hoit that range. The GM has some ability to
oppose.

Cinenmatic systems also have an idea to drive success and actions using success and excess
successes/complications. So 2d20 you roll under a target number between 6 and 20+ each roll
under the TN (Att+Skill) is a success each roll that is also under the skills focus is an additional
success. Additional dice can be added using motivators? to increase the total number of
successes, the diff range is 0 -5

Alternate system: Figure SkillSet roll 1d100, Every 10 Below the SkillSet is 1 success. So above
example 135 SkillSet, Diff is a 14. So a roll 50 would be 85 below, 8 successes. Hmm Still to
much math. So is add and count successes Its not needed. Teh 2d20 system is a compare is my
roll of 15 less than 12 the TN...

So no
SkillSet 135 = X successes roll xd 10 x= Skill depth roll and add?
SO SkillSet every 25 = 1 success Over 100 ever 5 =1 Success
SkillSet 135 would be 4 (100) + 7(35) = 8 + 2d10 = 10 (average) = 18 successes.
Past event adds 1d10, Passions add 2 Successes, Core Adds 5. After roll. Complications on a 1
Possible?? seems fast, low math? Bigger skillsets rewarded. But still more mathy than roll
and add

really its a question of compare versus add. really the question is do I want a very fast system,
meaning directly linkng the character build to the roll or disconnecting it. Meaning no matter
what they build I can create challenges that work against them, challenging the players. No top
End does that. The Dice roll means something too in this version.

So the question is how do I convert a skillset ad roll into meaningful successes? Its either beat
an Opposed EF in the Hundreds or set it to successes.... I dont want a calulator game and I keep
coming back to it.
roll 1d100 Under SkillSet 1 Success
50 or more under 2 successes
75 or more 3 successes
100 or 4 Successes
01 Exceptional Success
Past events Reroll
Passion + 2 Successes
Core +5 Successes

example 135 Skillset 90 = 1 Success 85 roll = 2 S 50 roll = 3 S 35 = 4 S 01 = Exception 2 over

Opp EF
Comps on a 90 + 100 Fail

Recharge Influence