Is a 3d6 encounter table too much? Do you prefer a 2d6 chart, or would a 3d6 Encounter table offer more options?
Do you prefer 2d6 or 3d6 charts?
- Thread starter Blue Ghost
- Start date
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
I'm with atpollard.
... probably just me, but I don't think that I ever want a campaign to end with ... You exit jump and [Roll (1)(1)(1)] ... "the ship is blown to smithereens" ... as a result determined by a random die roll.
[Like I said, it might just be me that has a problem with that.]
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Anyway, Blue Ghost was asking about encounter tables.
None of the above. I dodge using charts as much as I can in my games. When I have to use 'em, I tend to use them as a list of things to CHOOSE from, and I tend to choose whatever looks to be the most enjoyable and logical for the story, my players and me.
In someone game run by another...not my choice.
In someone game run by another...not my choice.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I prefer a 2D6 chart myself, as I do a lot of my own designing, and putting together a chart for 11 possible outcomes is sufficient to keep my busy. The other option I use is a straight 1D10 or 1D12 roll, when I am looking for each outcome having the same possible chance.
The main area that I do not use the straight 2D6 roll is in the Trade and Commerce table, determining what cargos may be available for transport or purchase. There the D66 works well, although I do play with that a bit.
I like the Vargr slaver party thing.
But yeah, I'm going to give this poll a few more days or a week.
I thought I had some really rocking encounters written up with a 3d6 chart in mind, but it's turning out to be problematic. Oh well.
Thanks for the feedback.
But yeah, I'm going to give this poll a few more days or a week.
I thought I had some really rocking encounters written up with a 3d6 chart in mind, but it's turning out to be problematic. Oh well.
Thanks for the feedback.
Have you ever seen the T20 extended version of the goods table? it's d100 instead of d66, and expands the Bk2 table just a bit. ( just under 3x... to 102 entries.)
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
the d6 by d6 matrix is my preferred way of designing encounter tables.
... probably just me, but I don't think that I ever want a campaign to end with ... You exit jump and [Roll (1)(1)(1)] ... "the ship is blown to smithereens" ... as a result determined by a random die roll.
[Like I said, it might just be me that has a problem with that.]
I can relate.
I was running a AD&D game for two others when they encountered a morkoth.
"save vs. Spell at -4!"
*rattle* "Fails!"
*snatches die back up* "That's not my roll!"
"Too bad. Saw it. You're dead anyway, because the Monster Manual says so."
So dies a 9th level fighter. In retrospect, I should have just taken a limb and had him reroll the save due to the injury. Live and learn.
Not that I wept too much at the time. The guy was a min-maxer and a rules para-legal.
~~~~~~~
As for what table to use, build the one you need. A 3D6 table sounds like too much work; a 2D6 is given as standard; but I've seen 1D6 tables that depended on terrain.
Last edited:
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I do not have T20, and doubt that I will worry about it. I may give some thought to going to a D6 and D10 system, giving 60 possible cargos, but I cannot see most planets having 100 possible cargos. I tend to look at the planet characteristics and figure out what it may have for trade. That reduces the possible cargos by a bit.
I vote 3d6. 3D6 is the best tradeoff for me between granularity and coefficient of variation. Although now I am playing with 1D6+1D10 to see what that looks like too - thanks, Aramis.
In fact I would like to see a new version of CT (with classic sensibilities, e.g. short skill list etc.) based entirely off of 3D6, UPP and all.
Not sure what someone meant by 2D6 being a flatter curve. To my eye 3D6 is a flatter curve because the peak of the distribution (10/11) is not as high above the tails (12 percentage points vs 14pp for 2D6).
In fact I would like to see a new version of CT (with classic sensibilities, e.g. short skill list etc.) based entirely off of 3D6, UPP and all.
Not sure what someone meant by 2D6 being a flatter curve. To my eye 3D6 is a flatter curve because the peak of the distribution (10/11) is not as high above the tails (12 percentage points vs 14pp for 2D6).
Flatter curve may or may not have been the best way to express it. What I meant is easily explained ...
Result (12) on a 2d6 curve is really interesting and as a Ref, I hope to have a chance to use it some day. I roll one encounter each game day. I can expect to statistically achieve that encounter once every 36 days. (6x6)
Result (18) on a 3d6 curve is really interesting and as a Ref, I hope to have a chance to use it some day. I roll one encounter each game day. I can expect to statistically achieve that encounter once every 216 days. (6x6x6)
My character spends 7 days in jump and 7 days on a world adventuring while the crew deals with cargo (not my job). So about 180 days of encounters in one game year (probably longer than an entire campaign will run). On the 2d6 table, I will encounter that great result (12) several times during the campaign. On a 3d6 table, I will probably NEVER get that great result (18). For me, the (18) might as well not even be there since it is so unlikely to be rolled.
I want a better chance of getting ANY result on the table. For example, a d66 table gives me 36 different results but all have exactly the same chance ... that would be the ultimate 'flat curve'. (Technically, not a curve at all and neither is 2d6, but that is statistical nitpicking.)
While presenting more encounters seems to be a good thing, it really comes down to what you do with the encounters you have.
You could give one referee a thousand encounters and he'd still produce a boring session, while another referee could create excitement from a single encounter.
You could give one referee a thousand encounters and he'd still produce a boring session, while another referee could create excitement from a single encounter.
Depending upon how specific one gets, it's possible to get 60 out of the Port of Anchorage alone. Thousands from the port of seattle. The categories in T20 are about the same as in CT (and includes all 36) but fills in some of the missing ones.
Similar threads
