White box damage

Summary:

not so deep as a well, nor so wide as a church-door; but 'tis enough

White box damage

Oban 1258755254|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I like the old-school house rules we have been using, which I think Tavis derived from Chainmail. The rules are here: http://redbox.wikidot.com/white-sandbox-rules.

Quick re-cap: the player rolls 1d6 damage, and the DM rolls 1d6 modifier. For small weapons the lesser of the two rolls prevails. Medium weapons use the player’s roll, and for two-handed weapons, the larger of the rolls prevails. Doubles produce a DM-determined special effect appropriate to the situation.

I started to wonder what exactly taking the better of two dice gets you – is it a minor boost or a big one? The result surprised me, so I want to share.

The second die means that the player using the dagger or mace has less than a 3% chance of doing 6 damage; only 11% of doing five or more. Alternately, the two-handed weapon is going to do 5-6 damage a full 55% of the time, and will roll 1 damage less than 3% of hits.

(Baseline medium weapon, like a long sword, has a 33% of doing 5-6 damage)

Rolled dice	Mean Damage
Less of 2D6	2.5
1D6	3.5
Greater of 2D6	4.5

Is this a big enough gap to interfere with role play choice? For instance the fighting man who wants to use a mace and shield is heavily penalized vs. the fighting man wielding a long sword or spear with shield.

It is not as clear as it may seem at first; you have to also consider the idea that shorter weapons have an initiative advantage once melee begins. And that wielding two one-handed weapons allows for two to-hit rolls. And the benefits of a shield over a two-handed weapon, &tc.

But we should not overlook how important these choices can be, mechanically.

Re: White box damage

Quendalon 1258755726|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I believe that Tavis is also applying modifiers to each weapon based on the defender's armor type, so that certain weapons are more or less effective against, say, plate. This will have a significant impact on the situational utility of specific weapons.

Re: White box damage

Oban 1258757080|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Yes! That is another factor to consider. I keep meaning to go through Blackmoor and Greyhawk to find the mods he is using so I understand them better. I do not have a copy of Chainmail, so I cannot see if there were modifiers that far back…

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1258763869|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

The weapon vs. AC tables I (sometimes) use come from Chainmail using 2d6, are reproduced in the Ready Ref Sheets, and are translated to d20 rolls into Supplement I (the reproduction of which in RRS is what I use). I consider their Chainmail pedigree worthy of 3LBB-purist inclusion!

When I was trying to understand how Gygax converted the mods-to-2d6 system into a mods-to-1d20 one, I converted the 2d6 weapon-vs-AC target numbers to their probability, and then back-convered that to what you'd need to hit on d20. Here's the result, which should both give some hints on which weapons are good to use vs. which armors and also indicate that Chainmail is insane. The first number is without shield, the second is with.

Last edited on 1258904772|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover By TavisAllison + Show more

Re: White box damage

James_Nostack 1258764390|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Oban, there's a (to me) infamous post where I write that "higher of 2d6" is equal to 1d6+1. Which is true over the long-haul looking at mean damage, but is still kind of embarrassing to type for someone with a math degree.

Re: White box damage

Oban 1266338696|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Forgive this clumsy chart.

Last session we debated two ways to apply a magical AC bonus. Either as a to-hit adjustment (which requires record-keeping and finagling with the AC vs. Weapon charts) or as a sv. vs. damage, applied only when you are actually hit.

I needed to settle for myself if the expected damage generated by each method was equal: it is not. (Although there is a set of situations for which the boni are equal, most combinations show a difference).

The sv. vs. damage bonus is a significantly weaker - on average - form of protection. I am not averse to either system, although if we do keep the sv. throw version, there are consequences we have to think through - for instance it makes a Protection vs. Evil spell less effective.

Die Roll	1HD vs. AC:4	AC:3	AC:4 with +1 sv. vs. damage
1	0	0	0
2	0	0	0
3	0	0	0
4	0	0	0
5	0	0	0
6	0	0	0
7	0	0	0
8	0	0	0
9	0	0	0
10	0	0	0
11	0	0	0
12	0	0	0
13	0	0	0
14	0	0	0
15	3.5	0	3.325 (=3.5 * 95%)
16	3.5	3.5	3.325
17	3.5	3.5	3.325
18	3.5	3.5	3.325
19	3.5	3.5	3.325
20	3.5	3.5	3.325
Expected Damage	1.05	.875	.9975
Percent Reduction		17%	5%

Re: White box damage

Invincible Overlord 1266340698|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I'm not sure what charts Tavis is using as his go to for to hit rolls, but aren't they usually discontinuous in a way that would, in many circumstances, make a reduction of 1 in AC decrease hit probability by 10-15%? That's a big deal.

I needed to settle for myself if the expected damage generated by each method was equal: it is not.

Marry me.

Re: White box damage

Oban 1266342620|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I'm not sure what charts Tavis is using as his go to for to hit rolls

I think we have been using the basic attack matrix from pg. 19-20 of Men & Magic. But Tavis also has mentioned using the weapon vs. AC chart (in this thread, above). I meant to ask about that chart on Saturday but got too excited by our adventure in Limbo to remember it.

That chart seems to indicate that only a complete idiot of a fighting-man does not use a flail or morning star. It also seems that a shield frequently bumps your AC up by 2 or 3, rather than 1.

This is why I do not care too much how we run AC boni - there are so many other things going on that it may not matter very much. As long as our enemies get the same treatment, it all comes out in the end.

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1266348866|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

No, the White Box charts are continuous for AC: the difference between AC X and AC X-1 is always 1. They are slightly discontinuous with regard to level or hit dice.

I whipped up a brute force calculator to look at a range of ACs. Assumptions were:
- 100,000 rolls is good enough
- although the AC table is indeed linear I only dealt with examples that wouldn't go outside the 2-9 range
- you are being attacked by a 1 HD monster

It does seem like the save-vs-damage is weaker, but I love it so! I thus tried out a version where the save is 1-in-10 per plus rather than 1-in-20 (i.e., the ones digit on a d20; if you say "zeros are good" and if you roll a 10 or 20, Fred the talking fish saves your ass). Here are the results:

AC	% hit	% hit if AC is one better	% hit if 1/20 save	difference 1/20	% hit if 1/10 save	difference 1/10
3	24.760%	20.182%	23.712%	-3.530%	22.602%	-2.420%
4	30.075%	25.096%	28.938%	-3.842%	26.885%	-1.789%
5	35.141%	29.834%	33.243%	-3.409%	31.261%	-1.427%
6	40.109%	34.839%	38.150%	-3.311%	35.876%	-1.037%
7	45.176%	40.035%	42.936%	-2.901%	40.545%	-0.510%
8	50.246%	45.195%	47.444%	-2.249%	45.040%	0.155%
9	55.274%	49.845%	52.237%	-2.392%	49.864%	-0.019%

If we extend that to look at monsters with higher hit dice, who will hit you on lower to-hit rolls, the 1-in-10 save method continues to be superior. (Note that the chart above covers number-to-hit 16 through 10).

# to hit	% hit	% hit if AC is one better	% hit if 1/20 save	difference 1/20	% hit if 1/10 save	difference 1/10
9	60.038%	54.921%	56.995%	-2.074%	53.991%	0.930%
8	64.898%	59.916%	61.731%	-1.815%	58.517%	1.399%
7	70.003%	65.215%	66.574%	-1.359%	63.282%	1.933%
6	75.169%	70.072%	71.215%	-1.143%	67.441%	2.631%

I like this system because:
- not making high ACs unhittable is a virtue of OD&D that I want to preserve; I like the fact that even someone in +1 plate & +1 shield has to sweat it 20% of the time, even if all their magic stuff causes them to then to avoid damage 4 times out of 10

- being able to look at the chart and say "a 17 for this monster will hit anyone" is a major virtue for me, as is having only four basic categories of armor to calculate to-hits against; leaving it up to you to do your magic defenses appeals to me

- as with our damage rules, I think moments when a PC's life is in danger are worthy of extra attention and dice-rolling; it's much more noticeable that Fred has saved your life when you roll a save because of him than when he's just a factor in your AC

- it seems to help low-AC people more (e.g., the effect is better than raising AC 9 to AC 8), which I like; similarly, it'll be more of a help when you're facing a 12 HD elemental who can hit you on a 6 or more!

Potential problems:
- it remains to be seen (by me, at least; perhaps the logic is clear to others) how a +2 AC bonus compares to a 4-in-10 save
- the system breaks down when you have a total of +5 in protection = 10/10 chance to save! Maybe different items are rolled on different dice - i.e., you roll a handful of dice equal to the number of protective items you have, looking for your lucky number on each?

Re: White box damage

Oban 1266349073|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

…and having read Eric's most recent post on the Mule Abides, I want to point out if you want this stuff to remain behind the DM's screen, Tavis, I am totally OK with that. Although I am curious about how you are applying the weapon vs. AC chart.

While I love to pick this stuff apart after a game session and worry out the effects, while I am playing I do not like to deal with any of this - I just want to roll the die and know if I hit or not.

From a comment on Grognarida a couple days ago:

The more char-gen is like playing craps, the more I like it. The more char-gen is like doing my taxes, the less I like it.

That concept applies broadly for me. As much as I like to geek out on min-maxing and understanding how a system actually works, it is more important that it be simple in play. That way, when we are focused on defeating the Nightmare and escaping the castle, and you ask, "How do you attack it."

"We use a flanking maneuver…" is a pun, and not a tactical discussion.

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1266349854|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Although I am curious about how you are applying the weapon vs. AC chart

Only occasionally, and as modifiers to a d20 linear curve; the chart I posted above is modifiers to a 2d6 bell curve (as in Chainmail), then back-translated to a d20.

Re: White box damage

Oban 1266350009|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

And if we use that system, you can even have different magic item classes: most are of the Shield +1 variety, allowing for the sv. vs. damage.

Others could be akin to Bracers of Defense and give a set AC: highly useful for Magic-Users and maybe others. For instance, instead of Leather +2, you would have Leather that is Chain Equivalent.

As to this:

system breaks down when you have a total of +5 in protection

I will be pleased if I never have that much bonus (at least at the levels we are likely to achieve playing once or twice a month!). If you consider two components to AC (the AC, and the save from magical boni) then you have even more room to move, with Plate being the ceiling.

To play devil's advocate: could this system become cumbersome once many players/NPCs in a combat acquire protective magics?

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1266351361|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

could this system become cumbersome once many players/NPCs in a combat acquire protective magics?

I think we're already seeing that experienced players internalize the process of rolling their hit dice vs. damage & handle this in a streamlined way; I think adding an extra dice roll to that process to see if you can negate the damage with a protective item is not too much additional burden.

Re: White box damage

Invincible Overlord 1266352890|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

save is 1-in-10 per plus rather than 1-in-20
how a +2 AC bonus compares to a 4-in-10 save
total of +5 in protection = 10/10 chance to save

What the darn?

Re: White box damage

Oban 1267501736|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

What the darn?

Could it be that discussion of old school D&D must become confusing and vague? After all, this was seemingly an emergent behavior we see in the writing of Messrs. Gygax, Arneson, Hargrave, etc.

Anyway, here is a to-hit prob. chart showing the effects of applying the AC bonus several different ways for a 1HD monster attacking.

AC	Normal % to hit	With AC+1	With 5% save	With 10% save	With 15% save
9	55%	50%	52.25%	49.50%	46.75%
8	50%	45%	47.50%	45.00%	42.50%
7	45%	40%	42.75%	40.50%	38.25%
6	40%	35%	38.00%	36.00%	34.00%
5	35%	30%	33.25%	31.50%	29.75%
4	30%	25%	28.50%	27.00%	25.50%
3	25%	20%	23.75%	22.50%	21.25%
2	20%	15%	19.00%	18.00%	17.00%

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1267502712|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Strange - your ability to actually understand this seems to produce results faster than my method of having Excel crank out 10,000 rolls for each value I wish to test!

Can you compare the benefits of AC +2 vs. two separate 10% saves, either of which would prevent a hit; or AC +3 vs. three separate such saves?

Re: White box damage

Invincible Overlord 1267531470|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

HEY, how plus is John's new armor? He's got a cloak of protection and a magic shield +1, so he might be the perfect test case. I'd like to put the final spreadsheet on his character sheet.

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1267532535|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

+1, you high-collared Thracian freak, you.

Last edited on 1267532554|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover By TavisAllison + Show more

Re: White box damage

Invincible Overlord 1267533471|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

i'm keeping my hair short. you never know when your court mage will turn on you.

Re: White box damage

Oban 1267542345|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

seems to produce results faster than my method

And yet the results are the same! I love statistics because once you understand roughly how they work, you can answer a lot of questions for yourself. Do the work, and there is a definitive answer. And if you are wrong, someone can pretty easily show you where. Gotta love it.

I was 30 before I learned enough stats to apply them in daily life, and felt about it the way The Onion did about Bruce Lee. Perhaps this should be pointed out in the "miseducation" thread?

Re: White box damage

Oban 1268162056|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Here are your charts for +2 and +3 comparisons.

These were done for a creature with 3-4 HD

AC	Normal % to hit	With AC+3	With three 10% saves
-1	25%	10%	17.5%
0	30%	15%	21.0%
1	35%	20%	24.5%
2	40%	25%	28.0%
3	45%	30%	31.5%
4	50%	35%	35.0%
5	55%	40%	38.5%
6	60%	45%	42.0%
7	65%	50%	45.5%
8	70%	55%	49.0%
9	75%	60%	52.5%

AC	Normal % to hit	With AC+2	With two 10% saves
-1	25%	15%	20%
0	30%	20%	24%
1	35%	25%	28%
2	40%	30%	32%
3	45%	35%	36%
4	50%	40%	40%
5	55%	45%	44%
6	60%	50%	48%
7	65%	55%	52%
8	70%	60%	56%
9	75%	65%	60%

Note that three separate rolls of 10% (sv. on 1-2) are more exciting, as the character rolls for their cloak, then plate, then shield - but the probability is equal to one roll of 30% (sv. on 1-6).

For monsters with magical protection, the referee can use a sv. vs. damage, which will look like this:

Cumulative spell/item protection	sv. vs. damage
+1	19
+2	17
+3	15
+4	13

Re: White box damage

Oban 1268164746|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

And another thing… (1)

Tavis wrote, on The Mule

Also, what do you think of implementing an AC bonus from high Dexterity using this system? I’ve avoided doing so because of not wanting to pollute the possibility of doing weapon vs. AC and the other reasons that I cite, but as it stands I think being mighty is substantially better than being skillful and it’d feel very pulp to give skillful characters a spotlight chance to dodge a blow.

My opinion on this is no to dex bonus. For three reasons (and I will take no offense if you ignore 'em).

First, it is not a part of the White box ruleset we are exploring. The Dex bonus first shows up in Greyhawk (pg. 8, where it says 15=+1, 16=+2, 17=+3, 18=+4), but there are a lot of things in the supplements we have not added, from variable HD for player class to variable damage by weapon type. I think the original two dex boni are enough (to hit with missiles and reaction bonus).

Second, bonus stacking. If you add dex bonus to armor and other things, fighting men will become really hard to hit for many creatures like gnolls. (On the other hand, maybe this is the only way fighting men survive multiple encounters with 12-HD water elementals).

Third, complexity. You are trying to streamline combat a bit - for instance, using one AC chart so you can keep track of armor type while players take responsibility for keeping track of their bonus rolls. Adding a dex bonus to the mix will further confuse things for you as referee and/or create another roll for the players.

If we want to make high-dex players stand out, I think leveraging the reaction bonus has more potential: letting them declare actions in advance of others, or roll separately from the party to get a chance to go ahead of the enemy even when the enemy has initiative, etc. OR, in a reversal of the way we have treated magical armor, you could give the character with 12+ dex an extra chance to try and hit with missile weapons. If they miss their to-hit roll, they get to roll a d20 again: on a 19-20 they hit, maybe in a special way they can describe. e.g., "I meant to hit the minotaur's eye and missed, but the arrow struck the gnoll behind him."

(1) I had time to think about all this stuff last night, and type out Into's past history… but seeing all my posts this afternoon I am feeling like the drunk guy on the next barstool over who will not shut up.

Re: White box damage

Quendalon 1268164912|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I had time to think about all this stuff last night, and type out Into's past history… but seeing all my posts this afternoon I am feeling like the drunk guy on the next barstool over who will not shut up.

If you feel the need to continue posting, why not put up some responses to my posts on the Mule? I'm feeling lonely and unread!

Re: White box damage

Quendalon 1268165059|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Also, you're talking about the problems of adding dex bonus to armor. Why not handle it like we're now handling magic bonuses, with an additional 1-in-10 chance to escape damage? Would that have the same gnoll-avoidance effects that you warn of?

Re: White box damage

Oban 1268166737|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

It is the stacking I am thinking about. Say for instance, John Fighter happened to have a 16 dex. A minotaur (6 HD) needs a 12 or better to hit, but then he gets a 50% save for each hit (or he gets to choose his 2 numbers on a d20 and try five rolls - 2 for dodging, and three for magic armor), meaning that the minotaur has about a 23% to hit him. A gnoll (1+ DH) ends up with about 12% to hit. A skeleton (1/2 HD) has 10% to hit…

Actually that is not too bad, is it, for a hero with magic armor and dex. bonus. I was worried that applying so many boni would leave John Fighter (for example) with only 3-4% chance of getting hit, but then this is actually in accord with the "hero wading into a sea of enemies" pulp feel we strive for.

And the 12 HD water elemental still has a 35% to hit him. (Where it would have a 45% to hit him if we applied AC bonus the old way).

Re: White box damage

TavisAllison 1268167772|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Yes, I was thinking of giving skillful characters a save.

The mighty bonus is what I'd probably make it resemble: mighty (normally Str 13-15) gives you +1 to damage, exceptional (normally Str 16-18) gives you +1 to hit.

Following that logic, skillful 13-15 would give you +1 to AC, exceptionally skillful gives you +1 to missile fire - or maybe the reverse?