It still generates a bell curve but the curve is flatter than even a 2d10's bell curve.
No, it generates a straight line, just like a d20--just like any single die.
Every single number is equally likely when you roll %, so there's no curve.
A Curve occurs when some numbers are more likely than others.
Do inanimate objects count as helpless, or are they a separate entity? If not, inanimate objects are actually harder to hit than armor-less, helpless creatures...If you are unable to respond at all that is when you are Helpless.Exactly!
Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks get no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.
As a full-round action, an enemy can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless foe. An enemy can also use a bow or crossbow, provided he is adjacent to the target. The attacker automatically hits and scores a critical hit. (A rogue also gets his sneak attack damage bonus against a helpless foe when delivering a coup de grace.) If the defender survives, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. Delivering a coup de grace provokes attacks of opportunity.
Creatures that are immune to critical hits do not take critical damage, nor do they need to make Fortitude saves to avoid being killed by a coup de grace.
I don't believe they count has helpless (as helpless is a creature condition) but their modifiers are close enough!
Armor Class: Objects are easier to hit than creatures because they don't usually move, but many are tough enough to shrug off some damage from each blow. An object's Armor Class is equal to 10 + its size modifier (see Table: Size and Armor Class of Objects) + its Dexterity modifier. An inanimate object has not only a Dexterity of 0 (–5 penalty to AC), but also an additional –2 penalty to its AC. Furthermore, if you take a full-round action to line up a shot, you get an automatic hit with a melee weapon and a +5 bonus on attack rolls with a ranged weapon.
|
It still generates a bell curve but the curve is flatter than even a 2d10's bell curve.No, it generates a straight line, just like a d20--just like any single die.
Every single number is equally likely when you roll %, so there's no curve.
A Curve occurs when some numbers are more likely than others.
I suppose you could call a straight line a really flat curve if you wanted to mangle the language, but it is a uniform distribution, not a normal one and certainly not a bell curve.
Actually, the vast majority of roleplaying games I've seen have the accuracy of the attack affect the damage. D&D is the only one I can think of off the top of my head that doesn't, actually.Seriously? How about Call of Cthulhu, Champions, Traveller, Mutants and Masterminds, Dragon Age, Villains and Vigilantes.. There are lots of games that use a roll to hit/roll damage mechanic in which the accuracy has limited effect on damage save for some kind of critical hit mechanism.Oh, ok, sorry. Let me rephrase:
D&D is the only game I can think of that I don't think is a terrible game (except possibly Dragon Age, which I never played).
And aren't M&M and V&V d20 games anyway?
Terrible? Call of Cthulhu is a terrible game? I assume you mean the mechanics...
Let's see, in D&D You can roll a 20, confirm the critical and still deal minimum damage...
A 1 HD monster can roll a 20 hitting a 45 AC, then roll maximum damage...
want to kill a level 20 character, throw a 1000 1 HD monsters at them...
To be blunt, that's not unrealistic. You put the best individual fighting man in the world alone against 1,000 inexperienced librarians who want to kill him, he's probably in trouble.
The 2d10 vs. d% argumenet... you guys need to step back. If you are adding the two dice together, it's a standard distribution. If you're using one die as the 10s place it is a uniform distribution.
This is very basic probability theory and if it interests you enough to bicker about it online, you owe it to yourself to read a wikipedia article about it.
As for the OP, you're forgetting the HUGE role that Strength plays in the game's combat assumptions.
stop by your local neighborhood karate tournement sometime, and watch the white-belts fight......minutes can go by between blows being landed...
Two average guys (assume all 10s) get into a fist brawl, they wear no armor with no bonuses or penalties (AC 10). There's a 45% chance to miss that person standing ready. First guy swings, although he doesn't have the unarmed feat, he'll be fine because neither does the other guy so no worries of provoked attacks of opportunities. Somehow he'll entirely miss the guy standing 5 feet in front of him 50% of the time, this goes both ways. Even if he does hit, if the damage roll turns out to be a 1, in narrative terms it was just a scuff (only when the damage knocks out his opponent does it matter). I can deal with the hitpoint damage, but why does he miss 45% of the time? I mean, he could of been using any weapon (a sword, a whip, a sling). What are these odds based on? What are we supposed to be describing it as? Dodging? although there's a feat for that which at most increases it by 5%. Parrying? although you could parry a sword with your fists, even without being a monk or having improved unarmed strike. Luck?
Just taking a deeper look at the reasoning and background of this mechanic deep cooked into the base of the game.
Edit: Thanks for the catch Bugleyman
It IS realistic though...
Look at a boxing match or a gun fight.I saw one dash cam video of a fire fight between a police officer and a fleeing felon. Both shooters emptied their magazines at each other in the space of a couple seconds and they were standing literally 5 feet apart at the start. Every round fired was a miss and neither shooter was armored. The officer was a trained marksman as all police officers are. No clue if the perp had any real training. Battle field statistics are no less telling when in Vietnam thousands of rounds were fired for every one that hit. Soldiers are both trained and usually have at least some basic armor.
stop by your local neighborhood karate tournement sometime, and watch the white-belts fight......minutes can go by between blows being landed...
You mean the pink belts?
It's definitely true, though. It's especially true in sport combat where touch = hit. That's where you start seeing strike percentages in the 10% and under range while everyone fights defensively or takes total defense actions. :-p
It IS realistic though...
Look at a boxing match or a gun fight.
I saw one dash cam video of a fire fight between a police officer and a fleeing felon. Both shooters emptied their magazines at each other in the space of a couple seconds and they were standing literally 5 feet apart at the start. Every round fired was a miss and neither shooter was armored. The officer was a trained marksman as all police officers are. No clue if the perp had any real training. Battle field statistics are no less telling when in Vietnam thousands of rounds were fired for every one that hit. Soldiers are both trained and usually have at least some basic armor.
Indeed it does have some real data to back it up, at least with firefights between the police and criminals. I would caution against using battlefield statistics to imply too much about fist fights. Fire and move tactics rely on suppressive fire to keep enemy fire down while other soldiers move into better positions for taking out the enemies. They're not really trying to hit their targets as much as keep them pinned under cover. I there may be some similar tactics in hand to hand combat, maybe quick jabs to keep the target on the defensive, but I doubt anyone will have the stamina to keep it up like a squad or two would be able to keep up suppressive fire.
Indeed it does have some real data to back it up, at least with firefights between the police and criminals. I would caution against using battlefield statistics to imply too much about fist fights. Fire and move tactics rely on suppressive fire to keep enemy fire down while other soldiers move into better positions for taking out the enemies. They're not really trying to hit their targets as much as keep them pinned under cover. I there may be some similar tactics in hand to hand combat, maybe quick jabs to keep the target on the defensive, but I doubt anyone will have the stamina to keep it up like a squad or two would be able to keep up suppressive fire.
If you're on the defensive in hand to hand combat, you're typically losing. If we're talking street fight conditions, a jab is a questionable choice of tactics at best because you're not likely to land a significant blow, but you are likely to tick your opponent off. Bas Rutten has said in the past that you're better off swinging with power shots in this situation because you're more likely to end the fight with any given hit and you're not likely to know your opponent's skill level or physical capabilities prior to a street fight.
The exception to this is if you are trained in hand to hand specifically for counterstrikes and you can land a serious jab, such as a strike to the nose, where you can cause significant damage with the jab's light hit, or if you are using the jab as a distraction for a power hit.
Generally speaking, you want to make any hand-to-hand encounter as short as possible. Jabs don't do that.
stop by your local neighborhood karate tournament sometime, and watch the white-belts fight......minutes can go by between blows being landed...
I've never been to a place that lets white belts spar AT ALL...Nor to a tournament, In ATA you had to be green to point spar at competitions, and it was light contact, where a near hit counted as a point if it wasn't blocked.