Rounding for Critical and Special Successes?

[Cowboy Duck]

Hey, all:

The text and examples for Special Success and Critical Success on page 175 in the big ol' BRP book show normal rounding for fractions. The Skill Results Table, shown on pages 172 and 384, contradict this and show rounding up.

Which method is preferred?

Thanks!

Matt

[Trifletraxor]

The old standard was normal rounding for fractions.

The best way in my opinion, is rounding down, as it makes the calculations much more easier.

:beetle:

[uruk]

Every reference I've seen for rounding has you rounding up, so unless you want to introduce exceptions that's what I'd recommend. I don't have anything official to add though...

[Atgxtg]

Normal rounding has been the standard in every BRP game. vI find it fairly easy, thanks to the "3/5/7/9 rule". The critical breakpoints are 20% apart, going up at 30%, 50%, 70% etc.

Some people prefer a straight 1/10% percentage (ala Stormbringer),.

I think it all kind of boils down to how well a particular group can handle the math. Some people can calculate critical chances in their had on the fly, others find the 5% critical chance to bog their game down. Personally, I think that practically everybody should be able to calculate the special and critical chances in their heads, but apparently that is not the case.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Atgxtg

[RMS]

I think it all kind of boils down to how well a particular group can handle the math. Some people can calculate critical chances in their had on the fly, others find the 5% critical chance to bog their game down. Personally, I think that practically everybody should be able to calculate the special and critical chances in their heads, but apparently that is not the case.

This is how we've always done it. It's easy enough, and I've never had a player who couldn't calculate 5% and 20% in their head. Late at night we may have to pause just a second, but that's it. Interestingly, it's only for Specials. Everyone seems to know their critical numbers, even after situation modifiers.

[sdavies2720]

Whenever there is a calculation, I round in the player's favor. After all, they're the stars. This doesn't apply if we have a table -- the table rules. But for half-skill things and such it works.

Steve

[Atgxtg]

This is how we've always done it. It's easy enough, and I've never had a player who couldn't calculate 5% and 20% in their head. Late at night we may have to pause just a second, but that's it. Interestingly, it's only for Specials. Everyone seems to know their critical numbers, even after situation modifiers.

I7m not surprised. We tend to think alike on a lot of topics around here. For me doing "divide by 10" is easy. THen I just mutiply that by two or divde by twoto get the percentages. Or just rember the 230%/50%/70%/90% breakpoints for crticals.

But as MRQ has illustrated, a lot of people can't do that sort of math in thier heads easy, or even work out the resistance table.

[Merak Gren]

Its not official, but the way I do it straight forward enough.

Think of a number, say 63.

Divide by 10= 6.3. Round down to 6.

For criticals divide by 2 = 3

For specials multiply by 2 = 12.

Its not exactly difficult maths and after a while it becomes second nature.

I've noticed that it doesn't quite fit the bables, but I am happy to round in the players favour if he is just about to miss out on a crit or special.

[RMS]

I7m not surprised. We tend to think alike on a lot of topics around here. For me doing "divide by 10" is easy. THen I just mutiply that by two or divde by twoto get the percentages. Or just rember the 230%/50%/70%/90% breakpoints for crticals.

But as MRQ has illustrated, a lot of people can't do that sort of math in thier heads easy, or even work out the resistance table.

<Insert rant on state of education system>

I don't know why this used to be considered such a simple task and now it's considered difficult. I'd guess it may have to do with far more computations done via calculator and computer and people doing less in their heads.

I've given exactly your idea to less math savvy people before and it works well. It has struck me before that making Specials half skill and Criticals half of that would reduce the computations to the simplest for most people, but I've never bothered implementing it.

[soltakss]

But as MRQ has illustrated, a lot of people can't do that sort of math in thier heads easy, or even work out the resistance table.

That's why RQ3 had a table showing the critical/special/fumble chances for skills up to 100%. It's an easy matter to do a table for skills up to 200% or higher.

[Atgxtg]

<Insert rant on state of education system>

Yeah, we think a lot alike on this.

I don't know why this used to be considered such a simple task and now it's considered difficult. I'd guess it may have to do with far more computations done via calculator and computer and people doing less in their heads.

I think it is a combination of the point you raised earlier, and a shift in the emphasis of RPG design. Back in the RQ days, games were getting more "realistic" and more math heavy to try to get a more detailed game model. Even D&D fans went though a lot of variant XP formulas. That required more number crunching ability among gamers. Today, the emphasis is on simple, fast,mechanics-lite rule systems. SO I think there is more opposition to doing math of any sort.

Plus, we did more math on a daily basis back then, before the PC revolution.

I've given exactly your idea to less math savvy people before and it works well. It has struck me before that making Specials half skill and Criticals half of that would reduce the computations to the simplest for most people, but I've never bothered implementing it.

My state has a 5% sales tax, so my stat7s tax table IS the RQ critical table. It probably helped people pick up the math when the realized it was the same as the sales tax the were calculating every day.

Edited January 18, 2009 by Atgxtg

[RMS]

Yeah, we think a lot alike on this.

Hey, I'd love to game sometime. I moved halfway across the country in your direction. All you have to do is move down the coast a bit!

My state has a 5% sales tax, so my stat7s tax table IS the RQ critical table. It probably helped people pick up the math when the realized it was the same as the sales tax the were calculating every day.

We've always had something screwy like 6.125% tax in the states I've lived in. However, a standard tip when dining out is 15% now, a number that's slightly more difficult to calculate than 5% or 20% (using your method), and is considered an acceptable calculation throughout society...

[Chaot]

Whenever there is a calculation, I round in the player's favor.

Yup. I round up for players and down for NPCs.

[Cowboy Duck]

Thanks for the input! I will be rounding up for the players, like what the chart shows, and possibly the important NPCs.

Next figuring critical and special successes question - do you calculate the chance for a critical or special off of the base skill rating or the modified skill rating, such as with an Easy task which doubles the skill rating?

Thanks!

Matt

[Chaot]

I would use the modified skill rating. My reason being, if it's easier to succeed, it's also easier to critical.

[RMS]

I always use the final modified skill rating. The major advantage of getting big bonuses is in improved chances to critical, special, and reduced chances of fumbles.

[Al.]

<Raises hands and chants in unconvincing Latin over the corpse of this thread>

SPQR and some web-available house rules for RQ suggest

<skill = success

<1/2 skill = special (or in some cases '2 successes')

<1/10 skill = critiial (or in some cases '3 successes')

If you want multiple levels of success and want to make mathematics as simple as possible (and no simpler) then that strikes me as a good model.

The concern over mental arithmetic (I suppose mental agility might be more appropriate) is well-stated but perhaps not that useful in a debate about a game which most people posting here want to get maximum exposure for.

The flaw with 1/10 as Critical and no Specials (which is what I tend to go for as laziness) is that potential damage is much reduced (as shown in MRQ where LongBows and Dragonewt BoneBows become GaussGuns to make up for the lack of double damage special hits)

Al

[frogspawner]

<"It lives!">

I have a utility that prints the special/critical/fumble chances on the PC's character sheets (and I don't use +/- modifiers, just x2 or x1/2 multipliers).

So it's a non-issue - even for my poor, hard-of-thinking players (bless 'em).