tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post5609941039762527814..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: Target 20 System AccuracyDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-80125918632491769792023-11-13T22:14:39.303-05:002023-11-13T22:14:39.303-05:00I solved it(for me) by giving bonuses based on lev...I solved it(for me) by giving bonuses based on level. It's still T20, just non leveled characters get a -1, level 1 to 3 get no bonus, level 4 to 9 get +1, 10 to 25 get +2, 25 to 36 get +3. Kinda drew from the 5e proficiency bonus for that, but scaled to BECMI. Lance Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13817319325489613672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-40716006438297349642023-11-13T22:01:19.593-05:002023-11-13T22:01:19.593-05:00I think that's right in the ballpark. I myself...I think that's right in the ballpark. I myself have done the d20 + ability score check >= 20 in the past, and WDM Paul still does it. (More recently I've embraced roll-under for that, similar to all the rll-under-on-d6 stuff baked through OD&D.) I committed quite some time ago to not worrying if something is off-by-one on a conversion; I'd always use a round number like 20 instead of 21, even if that's technically the exact translation.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-62130995714994256362023-04-29T12:13:40.985-04:002023-04-29T12:13:40.985-04:00So I've recently been implementing a bastardiz...So I've recently been implementing a bastardized version of target 20. Basically taking thaco and saves and just converting them to bonuses(to hit is 20-thaco +ac, and saves is 20-old style saves) and then just need to meet a DC of 20(in modern terminology). It's just reversing the math, but somehow makes more sense to the younger crowd coming from 5e. My problem is I've realized I did the math wrong for the saves(I think?) But more importantly I've also been applying this to ability checks of just add the stat to a d20 roll and succeed on a DC 20, but that should be a DC of 21 shouldn't it? Normally someone with an 18 dex has a 10% chance to fail a dex check, but with target 20 that's only a 5% chance of failure. I think... <br /><br />I'm trying to decide if it's even worth it at this point and just go with the traditional old school dnd way of doing things....Lance Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13817319325489613672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-40158944910726723032019-05-11T05:44:50.347-04:002019-05-11T05:44:50.347-04:00I was hoping someone used this in AS&SH before...I was hoping someone used this in AS&SH before me. Good to know it works well.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06866342116169555686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-87970396980805147032018-03-06T18:50:58.979-05:002018-03-06T18:50:58.979-05:00Awesome. That's good to know!Awesome. That's good to know!Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-29350260219394719002018-03-06T01:23:38.965-05:002018-03-06T01:23:38.965-05:00I've been using Target 20 in AD&D (not ent...I've been using Target 20 in AD&D (not entirely perfect but close enough) and when running Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea. In that game fighting ability is a separate # that perfectly fills in the Target algorithm (a base 9 AC system doesn't hurt either).ligehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00652431558688176341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-67983338924503183272018-03-05T19:21:06.630-05:002018-03-05T19:21:06.630-05:00I'm currently running Whitehack (a heavily mod...I'm currently running Whitehack (a heavily modified S&W: White Box), so all the conversions are already done, and for published modules it's no worse than converting between ascending and descending AC. The multiple (usually one, sometimes two) comparisons are actually pretty easy in practice and quick to do.<br /><br />I was quite impressed at how intuitive it felt when I tried it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-42917322381236796032018-03-05T18:55:18.321-05:002018-03-05T18:55:18.321-05:00I can't say as I've ever thought about tha...I can't say as I've ever thought about that. At first blush, it seems like the multiple conversions, and two comparisons per roll, seem fiddly.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-53538060016481607892018-03-05T08:49:18.195-05:002018-03-05T08:49:18.195-05:00Can I ask what your thoughts are on the Roll Under...Can I ask what your thoughts are on the Roll Under Blackjack style system are?<br /><br />Basically you aim to roll under your score (attribute, AV, ST, whatever), but as high as possible. For opposed rolls, both parties roll, if one passes and the other fails, the first wins. Otherwise, highest roll wins. Extra difficulty is achieved by increasing the minimum roll required, bonuses can be granted to the score before rolling.<br /><br />Example: a fighter has AV (attack value) 12, and attacks something wearing chain (AC 4). They pass if they roll 5-12.<br /><br />It's rather handy, because the player can roll and instantly see if it was good enough and announce that they passed an attack check with a 4; that is better than the 2 needed to hit leather armour so the GM confirms a hit (without acknowledging the type of armour worn). Key benefit: it's all straight comparisons, no addition or subtraction required.<br /><br />It does run into issues when scores get very high, but it seems to work nicely for OD&D and B/X score ranges (let AV = Attack Bonus+10, and AC = ascending AC-10, but otherwise it's the same).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-8177387975337402242018-02-28T09:50:00.741-05:002018-02-28T09:50:00.741-05:00So cool, thanks for sharing that! Apparently in th...So cool, thanks for sharing that! Apparently in the logo, the "Target" is Haettenschweiler Regular, the "2" is Jasmine UPC, and the "0" is a handmade circle (I farmed out the creation). Feel free to copy-paste the image above if you're looking to recreate it. :-)<br />Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-1765726050647352632018-02-28T00:37:44.315-05:002018-02-28T00:37:44.315-05:00I've done a fair job of conditioning my player...I've done a fair job of conditioning my players to accept the roll-under method for all task-resolution rolls in my game (e.g. for an attack roll, the chance to hit is defender's AC + attacker's to-hit bonus in 20). I find this more intuitive, because all rolls made to determine "whether something happens" (attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks) can be expressed as "chance X in die-size Y", and the player automatically knows the odds before rolling.<br /><br />Also, when you convert everything to roll-under, you start to notice some similarities, like the chance for a 1st level character of any class (ignoring ability mods) to hit a foe in chainmail, the average chance for a 1st level character or 1 hit die monster to make a saving throw, and a great many "skill" or "searching" or "listening" type checks, have a 7 in 20 chance (or a 2 in 6) chance to succeed, quite close. Enough so that you can take handy shortcuts, like rolling saving throws for large groups of low-level monsters on d6s, counting results of 1 or 2 as success. Handy, when a caster drops an area-effect attack on a mob of skeletons or goblins!John Higginshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06522143715905888511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-24184941646000893482018-02-27T20:05:35.990-05:002018-02-27T20:05:35.990-05:00I've adopted this for my G+ homebrews since I ...I've adopted this for my G+ homebrews since I saw it in the "Searchers of the Unknown" collection. Which 2 fonts are used in the logo?Lee Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06698873084592329937noreply@blogger.com