Converting a % system to a 1-20 system

[jayeff]

This is actually about WHFRP rather than BRP. However WHFRP was basically a ripoff of RQ so in some ways it is at heart a BRP system. (I think)

I asked about this on a couple of WHFRP forums and the reaction made me feel like a heretic the witchhunter had just exposed. The WHFRP community seem quite happy with their % based mechanics and couldnt grasp why I would want to do it differently.

I have seen the mechanics I am tinkering with given consideration here so hopefuly though I'm not asking about a BRP game I might get a more constructive response.

I find, with BRP games (CoC and the like) that the % mechanic is very 'swingy'. (I think that's the right word to define it). For instance, having 80% skill means you can as easily roll over that and there's nothing stopping you. And you can even roll over that frequently. Now I realise rolls should only be used for dramatic reasons and you can also bring in modifiers etc. But it's fun to roll when there's always a chance of error. And with a % scale juggling modifiers and using bands of success etc etc can get a little cumbersome. Especially if you are a little maths dyslexic like me.

Switching to 1-20 makes it so much easier to start messing with modifiers, setting target numbers and levels of success etc.

Getting back to WHFRP one of the players has a PC with a Weapon Skill of 54 and a Ballistic Skill of 65. In WHFRP those two abilties work more like attributes rather than actual skills. He's a 4th career character (I have no idea what that compares to in D&D terms) so not exactly a novice. 54 and 65 are both a bit meh and combat is going to be very long and tedious with those percentages. Switching it to 1-20, with each 5% increment beicoming 1 point that flips the 'attributes' to 11 and 13. Which by D&D d20 standards is still a bit average. However with a roll over/under system and modifiers he can start being a bit more effective in combat and it'll move quicker with a little less math involved.

Of the two I'm leaning more towards roll over. (Roll under on d20 seems basicaly the same as using d100, just on a smaller scale).  With roll over you can do skill plus modifiers. Also, as I saw pointed out elsewhere in a thread here - a roll over system makes it easier to handle opposed rolls, which is something I want.

Possibly there's a way to make it even crazier by using 2d10 or 3d10 and exploding any 10s. Allowing for insane 1 shot crits. Just because the stats are on a 1-20 scale doesnt mean the dice have to be.

I'm a big fan of the systems where you can succeed or fail but with complications / bonuses. I'm not entirely sure how you could apply that here other than with bands of succes or something.

I think in essence I dont want to overly convert the system too much. Just figure something quick and dirty otherwise I will have to spend hours fiddling with NPC and monster stats etc.

That's about as far as Ive managed to figure out so any insight or suggestions of systems that might do what I'm trying to do would be appreciated.

Edited January 11, 2022 by jayeff
coherence

[Lloyd Dupont]

While I am also intending to work on a custom skill based game system with D20... your particular critic doesn't seem valid to me... 

D20+ skill could fail just as easily. Adding +20%/+40% or doing skill%x2 or x4, both mechanics suggested in the BRP I think, for easy roll, is just as easy and yield the same benefits.

My personal pet peeve is with opposed roll. Don't like either the blackjack approach (most common) (just a matter of taste I suppose) or the compute your margin of success in percentile (seems a bit too computationally involve to me for all players and GM and rolls all day)

as a side note whether one use a D20 or D%, apart from the evil Letter&Letter vibe is no biggie. What is important I think, for people like us that like BRP game, is that the game remain classless skill based. D20 might work just as well! 😜 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Lloyd Dupont

[Joerg]

55 minutes ago, jayeff said:

I'm a big fan of the systems where you can succeed or fail but with complications / bonuses. I'm not entirely sure how you could apply that here other than with bands of succes or something.

Sounds like you want something like Questworlds, where every roll is an opposed roll between the player and the GM rolling for whichever agency or natural force may impede the task. Both sides count successes, with high abilities able to give an auto-success, and an option for players to buy a few extra successes in the course of a session.

How you roll for success or crits doesn't matter much, it is more important to compare success levels - a crit counts as an extra success. (It is the one roll outcome that an extra point cannot buy up.) The side with more successes wins, the other side takes a loss - not necessarily in the story arc, but e.g. a wound that will impair future rolls unless resources are expended (such as time in the game setting). On the not so unlikely result of a draw, you have a "Yes, But" situation for the planned outcome of your roll.

[NurgleHH]

A good example is Trudvang Chronicles. A D100-System converted into D20. Dividing by 5 is too simple. I'm afraid.

[Zit]

RQ1 & 2 were almost d20, with their 5% increments. Except for the crits and specials.

[Atgxtg]

You might want to have a look at Pendragon. 

It uses a modified d20 game mechanic, nicknamed the "blackjack method."

The way it works is that you roll under the character's modified skill to succeed. Most rolls are opposed and the higher successful (that is under the skill rating) roll wins. This includes combat, with the winner rolling damage against the loser. Some of the finer points of the game mechanic are:

• A roll of the modified skill score exactly is a critical success, and beats or normal success. 
• A "20" is a fumble, unless the modified skill score is 20 or greater, in which case it is a critical.
• If the modified skill score is greater than 20, the amount over 20 is added to the die roll, increasing both the chances of winning and the chance of a critical success. For example,a skill score of 25 would mean the character would add 5 to his die roll, and any roll of 15 or greater would become a 20 and be considered a critical success.

 

[Mugen]

What makes a system like WHRP swingy is that attributes are in a relatively small range when compared to the die in use.

Most beginners will have attributes between 20 and 50, and even experienced characters will rarely have more than 70%.

Which means attributes will fall in a range that is half the total range of possible results you can get with a roll of 1d100.

If you want things to be less "swingy", using different dice, with non-linear distribution, is a solution, but not the only one. You can also use a different attributes scale, where seasoned characters have attributes far above those of beginners, and even beyond 100%. See how Pendragon uses values over 20 for very high skills.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Mugen

[Mugen]

23 hours ago, Mugen said:

What makes a system like WHRP swingy is that attributes are in a relatively small range when compared to the die in use.

(...)

If you want things to be less "swingy", using different dice, with non-linear distribution, is a solution, but not the only one. You can also use a different attributes scale, where seasoned characters have attributes far above those of beginners, and even beyond 100%. See how Pendragon uses values over 20 for very high skills.

Just to clarify things a bit : when I wrote "a relatively small range when compared to the die in use", I had the Standard Deviation of the di(c)e used in the game. This value is a good indication of the "swingyness" of a roll when compared to the range of possible results.

For instance, a d20 has a standard deviation of 5.77 and a range of 20 possible results. 3d6, with 16 possible results and a Standard Deviation of 2.96 are "less swingy", as their SD/Range ratio is smaller.

[jayeff]

Not being able to reply for 24 hrs is frustrating. Anyway…

@Lloyd Dupont

I realise adding +20% to 65 or adding +2 to 13 is effectively the same thing. Adding modifiers to % numbers may seem easy to you. But my brain finds it a lot easier if I turn that 1-100 range into a 1-20 range and then work from there.

If the solution is giving a pc with a 65% weapon skill +20%, (or a 13 skill +2) just so he hits more often you may as well just up his skill to 85% (or 15). Has to be a better way.

The opposed roll idea I am talking about is only in regards to PC vs NPC I am not talking about opposed rolls from the GM as a mechanic for skill resolution.

WHFRP isn’t quite class based. Or exactly skill based either. You have careers and each career comes with a package of specific skills. Career paths have a finite length. It is possible to pick any new career if you want a specific skill. Though it’s generally easier to pursue careers that are logical next steps from your previous career.

It’s a good middle ground between D&D and BRP and like in the RQ world ‘adventurer’ isn’t exactly a job in Warhammer.

@Joerg

Like I said to Lloyd Dupont I only meant opposed roles in regard to other NPCs, not as a resolution mechanic for everything. My group play on discord with a dice app and that’d get super messy and confusing. If Questworlds works like that then it probably wont work with what I’m doing here.

I’ll see if I can get a look at that system anyway. Some of the other stuff you mention might be applicable to what I’m doing for mixed result outcomes.

@NurgleHH

Oof, well it’s the hand I’m dealt so it’s what I have to try and work with. The only quick and dirty way to getting a 1-100 scale more ‘manageable’ seems to be making it 1-20. There has to be some way of taking a small step from there.

It clearly isn’t d20 considering how the sample character translates UNLESS you lower the required TN for rolls. so that a skill of 11 or 13 is more likely to succeed.

I don’t like that though. I want something where the dice mechanic can explode meaning even a little goblin can you stick you with the pointy end and do you in. It is grimdark Warhammer after all not D&D.

@Zit

Thanks. I’ll take  a look

@Atgxtg

Pendragon was mentioned in a similar thread. It sounds like its doing some stuff differently from what I want. But it might still be doing enough to be the best choice.

I saw “blackjack” mentioned before as well, but assumed it was a reference to the card game rather than the Pendragon’s system. (I have no idea how the blackjack card game works but I assume there’s a similarity.)

@Mugen

Yes I think you’ve nailed the problem. These PCs aren’t really beginner either, 4th career is like D&D 6-8th level I think. Admittedly the sample PC is a bit of a jack of all trades rather than combat monster. But even the party’s main fighter is only at 76%

I don’t think working with a 1-20 range is the problem and I don’t really want to convert that yet again to something else. It’s just down to using the right dice mechanic.

Anyway, I’ll check Pendragon out. I don’t own a copy so I’ll see if a buddy has it or grab the pdf off Drivethrough. It seems to be the first thing on most people’s mind for what I’m going for.

 

Maybe something Gumshoe, like Mutant City Blues, is the way to go. Gumshoe fixed some of the inherent issues with % systems in a more elegant way. (AFAIK) Maybe it has a fix for combat too and MCB might handle combat with magic items/spells as easily as combat with super powers.

Something that might tick all the boxes is the D&D/d20 method but with 3-5d6, +/- stat bonus/penalty and beating a (lower) target number. Possibly the quantity of dice is decided by where you are on the 1-20 scale. Maybe that is still somewhat linear and possibly still problematic. And I’ve possibly just described an existing system there.

Or possibly even simpler is just to roll 3-4 d6 and add that to the skill. Do away with the -/+ and just have a slightly higher TN.

I appreciate a single d20 or even a d10 would be sufficient. There’s a specific reason for using several d6 rather than 1 die. I wanted something where 1s on the dice count as a complication and 6s as advantages. Kinda like how Cortex/Genesys do things. Which is an element I wanted to bring in. Even a lowly goblin could still ruin your day if they all come up 6s.

Edited January 15, 2022 by Scotty
edited so that @ pings writer.

[olskool]

Have you ever heard of the UNISYSTEM?  It is a 1D10 system where the GM sets a target number and you roll a 1D10, then add any Skills and Attribute bonuses to that number.  If the total equals or exceeds the Target Number, you succeed.  I have an RPG called CONSPIRACY X that uses it.  It is a fast and simple system.

I also like Twilight2000 Version 2.2's  D20 system.  You add a Skill (rated from 1 to 10) to one or more Attributes like STR or INT (also rated from 1 to 10) for a combined number known as an ASSET, that you must roll roll equal to or under on a D20 for an average task.  This is essentially a percentile system converted to D20.   For your inspection, the SKILL DIFFICULTY LEVELS for a perfectly average skill (5) and Attribute (5) [an Asset total of 10] are...

EASY Tasks:  2 X Asset (20 or less on a D20).

ROUTINE Tasks:  1.5 X Asset (15 or less on a D20).

AVERAGE Tasks:  1 X Asset (10 or less on a D20).

FAIRLY DIFFICULT Tasks: 0.75 X Asset (7 or less on a D20).

DIFFICULT Tasks: 0.5 X Asset (5 or less on a D20). 

FORMIDABLE Tasks: 0.25 X Asset (2 or less on a D20). 

IMPOSSIBLE Tasks: 0.1 X Asset (1 on a D20). 

The system has you create a TASK PROFILE that combines the Skill needed, any alternate Skill or Skills that can be substituted (sometimes at an INCREASED Task Difficulty Level), the Attribute OR Attributes to be combined (when combining Attributes, they are AVERAGED rounding down), and time needed to complete the task.  The Attributes combined allows you to change out Attributes for differing tasks.  For Example, CLIMB might require (it actually does in my Twilight2000 game) the AVERAGING of STR, CON and AGL and adding that to the Skill Level.  Rigging up "improvised climbing gear," however would require INT (for your ability to think outside the box) and EDU [Education] (for you understanding of just how a given piece of climbing gear actually functions).   Thus, Task Profiles allow you to "design tasks" that suit any situation that campaign needs to meet. 

The system also allows the use of D&D 5e's ADVANTAGE & DISADVANTAGE system.  You simply roll TWO 1D20s and take the LOWER of the results for ADVANTAGE and the HIGHER of the results for DISADVANTAGE (because this in a roll under system).   This is also how you do UNSKILLED tasks.  You add the appropriate Attribute (or Attributes average) to 0 (for no Skill) and roll 2D20, taking the HIGHER number as the result. 

We also added MYTHRAS's Combat Special Effects.  On a roll UNDER THE SKILL NUMBER ALONE [on an AVERAGE task], you can achieve an Outstanding Success.  This chance is modified by the Task's Difficulty Level so a Difficult Task Level would cut the 5 Skill above to a 2 or less chance of an Outstanding Success.  This allows you to pick a Combat Maneuver or gain some "Special Effect" determined by the GM.  This system is taken from Modiphius's 2D20 system and gives higher-skilled PCs & NPCs a better chance of getting an Outstanding Success.

This system is my MOST PLAYED system followed by my HEAVILY MODDED RQ2/RQ3/MYTHRAS game.                 

 

[jayeff]

@olskool

ok. a lot to unpack there

Unisystem - A roll and add to stat/skill/whatever is what I was thinking. Though I wanted to do it with 3d6 to enable the upside/downside mechanic (So a 6 means something good happened - even if you failed and a 1 does the opposite. Sort of Genesys style.) I also don't want to deviate from the 1-20 range as the base as that's the easiest step to get the 1-100 range more manageabe. And still. hopefuly, not 'break' the original WHFRP rules too much

Twilight 2000 - oof, ouch, no, oh my god. That's exactly the sort of thing I wanted to get away from. In WHFRP weapon skill IS an attribute and it's on a % scale. As T2K is a roll under on a flat scale it's inherently got the same problems as d100. Adding bands of success to that even with d20 seems like a lot of math slowing things down. Also isn't what I'd call 'elegant'. That para on Task Profiles made my brain hurt, and tbh I'd just give the player a +2 or something (on a 'roll over' system) if they had climbing gear. Too much fiddle there and too much time spent calculating and less time telling great story.

I guess the D&D/d20 way of doing advantage/disadvantage could work. If I do it in reverse. So the lowest roll is the one taken. If I didnt want to do the thing with 6s and 1s that might be a workable solution. I'll keep that on the table anyway as an option. WHFRP doesnt really have proper attributes like D&D does, most things you would use are given as a %. (eg you dont have 'Charisma' you have a Fellowship skill).

Mythras - still seems like some heavy overthinking of number ranges etc. I am about to play a 2d20 game a friend is running so I'll keep an eye on how that runs. Particularly as its being done in Discord with the dice app so be good to see how well it handles it.

You seem to quite like 'old school' systems. Which is fine. But isn't really my bag. I prefer to go a bit more minimalist. (try to anyway, doesnt always work!)

 

After some more tinkering I have this:

Roll 3d6 and add to skill/whatever.  Players may have small bonus or penalty for anything that hinders/adds to their ability.

The target number is the following, which may be modified for anything that complicates the objective (and isnt something directly related to the character)

Easy task 10 / Skilled task 15 / Difficult  task 20 / Challenging task 25 / Monumental task 30

Any 6s are a fringe benefit, even if the task failed or in addition to being successful. Any 1s are a complication in addition to failing, or in spite of being successful.

An obvious 'problem' with those numbers is that an average skilled person will always succeed at an easy task. But tbh they should. The fun starts when they roll a few 1s.

Edited January 16, 2022 by jayeff

[olskool]

3 hours ago, jayeff said:

@olskool

ok. a lot to unpack there

 

You seem to quite like 'old school' systems. Which is fine. But isn't really my bag. I prefer to go a bit more minimalist. (try to anyway, doesnt always work!)

 

After some more tinkering I have this:

Roll 3d6 and add to skill/whatever.  Players may have small bonus or penalty for anything that hinders/adds to their ability.

The target number is the following, which may be modified for anything that complicates the objective (and isnt something directly related to the character)

Easy task 10 / Skilled task 15 / Difficult  task 20 / Challenging task 25 / Monumental task 30

Any 6s are a fringe benefit, even if the task failed or in addition to being successful. Any 1s are a complication in addition to failing, or in spite of being successful.

An obvious 'problem' with those numbers is that an average skilled person will always succeed at an easy task. But tbh they should. The fun starts when they roll a few 1s.

Of course I like "old school" systems, we're in a BRP forum.  The original Runequest was written in the '70s!

If you're set on using the 3D6 format, take a look at Green Ronan Publishing's FANTASY AGE rpg.  This system rolls 3D6 but it does so with a twist.  Two of the D6s are white and the third D6 is another color (red, blue, black... it doesn't matter).  The system uses an ascending Difficulty Level and D&D 5e's Difficulties can be easily used (Fantasy Age's difficulties are oddly numbered, so I wouldn't use them).  So an EASY Task would be 5, an AVERAGE Task 10, a DIFFICULT Task 15, and so on.  You roll the 3D6, and add any Skill or Attribute bonuses to that roll.  If you equal or exceed the Task's target number, you succeed.  The difference in the system is that odd-colored D6.  It is called the STUNT DIE.  Whenever you roll, IF you roll two "6s" on any two of the three dice, you win a number of STUNT POINTS equal to the odd-colored STUNT DIE'S result.  The Stunt Points can be used to buy Combat Maneuvers & Special Effects from a list.  Less powerful abilities like Trip, or Redirect/Move Foe cost would about 1 Stunt Point.  More damaging results would cost more Stunt Points.  IF you still want the "exploding dice" effect, I would just make a rule saying that IF 3 results of "6" occur, then roll another WHITE D6 (there should only be ONE Stunt Die) and add it's result.  A roll of all "1s" is a Catastrophic Failure.  The D&D 5e ADVANTAGE & DISADVANTAGE system can be used as well.  Once again, just add a WHITE DIE and discard the LOWEST result for ADVANTAGE and the HIGHEST result for DISADVANTAGE.    

   

 

[jayeff]

47 minutes ago, olskool said:

Of course I like "old school" systems, we're in a BRP forum.  The original Runequest was written in the '70s!

 

haha ok fair point. the clue is literaly in your forum name too

I'll give AGE a look. It doesn't *have* to be 3d6 but 2 wasnt enough to generate interesting results and 5 generated them too often. The dice exploding isn't needed really, if 3 dice thow up a 6s that could be a 3pt stunt. Having 1 dice a seperate colour opens up other possibilities. I dont think the dice app we are using in Discord can pull that one off. Which is shame as it ticks a few boxes. Even if I can't implement AGE's exact dice mechanic, the list of stunts/moves etc could prove useful.

[olskool]

20 minutes ago, jayeff said:

 

haha ok fair point. the clue is literaly in your forum name too

I'll give AGE a look. It doesn't *have* to be 3d6 but 2 wasnt enough to generate interesting results and 5 generated them too often. The dice exploding isn't needed really, if 3 dice thow up a 6s that could be a 3pt stunt. Having 1 dice a seperate colour opens up other possibilities. I dont think the dice app we are using in Discord can pull that one off. Which is shame as it ticks a few boxes. Even if I can't implement AGE's exact dice mechanic, the list of stunts/moves etc could prove useful.

You can find used copies of FANTASY AGE online for about 10 bucks.  It's a newer game and still in print (I got mine at my local game store for $25 in hardcover).  You also get all the rules in a single book! 

[jayeff]

Or ten bucks on Drivethrough and saved myself some postage!

[Mugen]

21 hours ago, jayeff said:

After some more tinkering I have this:

Roll 3d6 and add to skill/whatever.  Players may have small bonus or penalty for anything that hinders/adds to their ability.

The target number is the following, which may be modified for anything that complicates the objective (and isnt something directly related to the character)

Easy task 10 / Skilled task 15 / Difficult  task 20 / Challenging task 25 / Monumental task 30

Any 6s are a fringe benefit, even if the task failed or in addition to being successful. Any 1s are a complication in addition to failing, or in spite of being successful.

An obvious 'problem' with those numbers is that an average skilled person will always succeed at an easy task. But tbh they should. The fun starts when they roll a few 1s.

I may be wrong, but It seems to me you assigned those values arbitrarily, with no regard to your abilities range.

I think the first step when creating an attributes and difficulty scale like this is to think in terms of what does each difficulty represents for each ability rating.

How often should an "average" character succeed at an Easy task ? a Skilled task ? a Difficult one ? And the same for a "weak" character", or a "strong" one.

And, remember that 50% is in fact a low chance of success, and rather difficult.

[jayeff]

You'd be very right and I'm quite aware the base numbers need tweaking. An average character should almost always succeed at an easy task and fail a skilled task at least a quarter of the time. I need to allow the possibility for a weak charcter to luck out now and then and for a strong one to very occasionally screw up. The 1s and 6s give a bit of leeway with that. AGE is the closest system I've found to what I'm working with here with regards target numbers and I just need to adjust their difficulty bands to work better with the 1-20 attribute/skill numbers I'm using.

Im very aware a 50% chance is quite bad and that's why I wanted to move away from a % system because that's generaly the level the characters are at due to the low power nature of Warhammer. It was mentioned in another thread that an airline pilot with a skill of 90% still fails 10% of the time so would you even get on that plane? (It was also pointed out that they should only need to roll in extreme circumstances, not every time they fly!)

[Atgxtg]

On 1/15/2022 at 10:00 AM, jayeff said:

@Atgxtg

Pendragon was mentioned in a similar thread. It sounds like its doing some stuff differently from what I want. But it might still be doing enough to be the best choice.

It is the only D100/Chasoium  game system based RPG that was designed around opposed rolls, and handles them better than pretty much any of it's relatives. Yes, it has it's own set of drawbacks, but it would handle a lot of what you are trying to do. 

Some of the nice stuff about Pendragon, which might appeal to you:

• it uses one basic game mechanic to handle everything. So if you know how to handle combat you know how to handle a singing contest, horse race, chess game, or whatever. 
• melee combat is handle with one opposed roll rather than with alternating attack and parries. This eliminates the need to determining who attacks first, tracking strike or Dex ranks, is a lot faster, and is a bit more like a real fight where attacks and defense integrated into each other.
• multiple opponents is really easy to handle as everyone is free to split their skill against opponents as they wish. 

It would be pretty easy to use the Pendragon game mechanics and then port of RQ2 skill base chances, skill categories and category modifiers,  on a D20 scale ( or even on a  D100 scale).  If you wanted to have more than two success levels (success, critical success) you could use the difference between the rolls. For instance the success level could get bumped up a step per every 5 points of difference between the die rolls. 

 

But I just tossed it out there so that you would be aware of it and could use it if it suited you. 

On 1/15/2022 at 10:00 AM, jayeff said:

I saw “blackjack” mentioned before as well, but assumed it was a reference to the card game rather than the Pendragon’s system. (I have no idea how the blackjack card game works but I assume there’s a similarity.)

LOL! Blackjack is a card game at casinos where the winning hand is the one that gets as close to 21 without going over. People use it as a way to explain the Pnedragon game mechanics, since in Pendragon you want to roll as close as you can to your modified skill score without going over.  For example, if you had a skill of 15, you would be better off with a roll of 14 (success) than a 16 (a failure because you rolled over a 15). The game mechanic was designed to allow for opposed die rolls without having to consult a  table or do math to see who did better. 

 

 

 

[Mugen]

16 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Some of the nice stuff about Pendragon, which might appeal to you:

• it uses one basic game mechanic to handle everything. So if you know how to handle combat you know how to handle a singing contest, horse race, chess game, or whatever. 

 

Well, that's only true if you consider that such tasks can be resolved in just one opposed roll.

Pendragon lacks a really unified extended opposition rule, like in MouseGuard or (Hero/Wars/Quest/Worlds), which are both true successors to Pendragon.

[jayeff]

I was only considering opposed rolls for any PC vs NPC situations. Not as PC vs the GM to resolve everything.

That said though, the obvious situation, combat, makes the one roll approach of Pendragon appealing. Particularly for mass combat.

Looks interesting anyway will check it out first chance I get.

Now Hero Wars did some interesting things, that's one I've always meant to look at.

[Atgxtg]

5 hours ago, Mugen said:

Well, that's only true if you consider that such tasks can be resolved in just one opposed roll.

Pendragon lacks a really unified extended opposition rule, like in MouseGuard or (Hero/Wars/Quest/Worlds), which are both true successors to Pendragon.

Actually it doesn't lack that, it just doesn't advertise it, probably because it doesn't usually need one. If you look at the horse race given in the initial adventure it uses a series of rolls to reach a set target number of success. The mechanic gets used sporadically in adventures, and supplements, and is really the underlying mechanic behind the battle system in the Book of Battle. But the nature of the game (knightly heroics) and the compressed time scale both work against the  idea of extended tasks, in general. Usually a long drawn out task isn't all that heroic, knightly, or exciting, although there are exceptions.

I have used extended tasks in some of my adventures. In one adventure the PCs had to play fidchell (a sort of medieval Irish Chess) against a dead king to get a magical item required to complete a quest, and since the game was so important I broke it down into an extended task to stretch out the drama. 

 

[Mugen]

On 1/18/2022 at 5:07 PM, Atgxtg said:

Actually it doesn't lack that, it just doesn't advertise it, probably because it doesn't usually need one. If you look at the horse race given in the initial adventure it uses a series of rolls to reach a set target number of success. The mechanic gets used sporadically in adventures, and supplements, and is really the underlying mechanic behind the battle system in the Book of Battle. But the nature of the game (knightly heroics) and the compressed time scale both work against the  idea of extended tasks, in general. Usually a long drawn out task isn't all that heroic, knightly, or exciting, although there are exceptions.

I have used extended tasks in some of my adventures. In one adventure the PCs had to play fidchell (a sort of medieval Irish Chess) against a dead king to get a magical item required to complete a quest, and since the game was so important I broke it down into an extended task to stretch out the drama. 

 

Your Chess game example is a good example of the reason why this rule is needed : because, sometimes, resolving a conflict with just one roll is just not satisfying.

I also didn't wait for HeroQuest 2 to come out to find out I could use a "roll X successes before Y failures" system in such situation.

But that fact that seasoned game master can extrapolate a general rule out of distinct sub-systems which can be found at different places is not the same as having that general rule written in the core rules. A beginner GM may not understand that this underlying rule exists.

 

[Atgxtg]

8 hours ago, Mugen said:

Your Chess game example is a good example of the reason why this rule is needed : because, sometimes, resolving a conflict with just one roll is just not satisfying.

Yes, and it has to do with a core game design concept, conflict. Conflict, when the stakes are high, and/or outcome is important to the player characters is interesting and exciting, so we usually want to draw it out. Meanwhile conflict when the stakes are low or outcome is of little to no importance to the player characters is boring and we usually want to resolve it quickly.

Now, as combat is often a matter of life and death, it tends to fall into the first category and thus has detailed, action by action rules. Most games assume that other skills are normally in the second category and try to resolve them quickly. But is really comes down to circumstances and characters. If a task is important enough (finding the secret entrance to wizard's workshop, preventing the warp core from exploding, or even winning American Idol), then any task could be interesting enough to be resolved as an extended task over multiple rounds with multiple rolls. Even something as mundane as filling out your taxes could be an interesting extended task in game if the PCs were under investigation by the IRS and faced serious consequences for any discrepancies ("Five Hundred dollars to consult with a medium? Fifteen hundred to buy Deep One repellent? Twelves thousand dollars to charter a boat to keep Cthulhu from wiping out humanity!!?? The government isn't stupid Mr. Smith and your  Pacific vacation is not deductible!")

 

8 hours ago, Mugen said:

I also didn't wait for HeroQuest 2 to come out to find out I could use a "roll X successes before Y failures" system in such situation.

Nor are you the first. The idea of a task being resolved over multiple rolls goes back a ways. At least as far back as a Traveller supplement (or maybe MegaTraveller), and even the old James Bond RPG made some use of it, with accumulating Quality Ratings (think BRP success levels).

8 hours ago, Mugen said:

But that fact that seasoned game master can extrapolate a general rule out of distinct sub-systems which can be found at different places is not the same as having that general rule written in the core rules. A beginner GM may not understand that this underlying rule exists.

It is a rule that exists in the core rules, for the horse race, it just not presented as a general rule for other types of tasks. Same with the Battle Intensity rules in the Book of Battle. Either could be turned into a general case rule. 

[Kloster]

30 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

At least as far back as a Traveller supplement (or maybe MegaTraveller)

Yes, Megatraveller is also the oldest game I remember having this kind of system fully integrated with the global one.

31 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

and even the old James Bond RPG made some use of it, with accumulating Quality Ratings (think BRP success levels).

Yes.

32 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

It is a rule that exists in the core rules, for the horse race, it just not presented as a general rule for other types of tasks. Same with the Battle Intensity rules in the Book of Battle. Either could be turned into a general case rule. 

Yes, but in that case, Mugen is right: it is easy for an experienced GM to see it, but a beginner one will not see what is behind.

[Atgxtg]

5 hours ago, Kloster said:

Yes, Megatraveller is also the oldest game I remember having this kind of system fully integrated with the global one.

Well it might have been the first RPG to fully flesh out the task resolution game mechanics in such detail. While RQ, Champions, Bond and several other RPGs did have a universal game mechainc for handling nearly everything, MT integrated extended tasks.

5 hours ago, Kloster said:

Yes.

RQ Vikings also did it with farming. So I think the idea had been around, just not codified as a thing, but instead applied ad hoc.

5 hours ago, Kloster said:

Yes, but in that case, Mugen is right: it is easy for an experienced GM to see it, but a beginner one will not see what is behind.

That's the thing about experience, it can't be taught. 😁

Pendragon, despite it's simplicity, really isn't all that beginner friendly. The culture and literature are richer and deeper than what most people realize when they think about King Arthur and the Knight of the Round Table, and the timeline traits, passions and pacing can be hurdles even for experienced GMs. It difficult to really shorten that learning curve without overwhelming a new GM with too much.

 

It's probably good that Greg did put something like that in the intro adventure, as it could get the wheels turning in the heads of new GMs.