Hi all,

I've always found the "double/triple" and endurance/spec grev chances
somewhat unclear, mainly because the table that lists the chances for
endurances & spec grevs does not match up with the the rules.

The combat rules state:
-  "A Strike Check of 15% or less of the Modified Strike Chance
results in damage directly affecting Endurance..."
-  "... a Specific Grievous Injury may occur if the Strike Check is 5%
or less of the Modified Strike Chance."

These rules are clear: the "%or less" statement can take care of any
decimals automatically (eg if 5% of SC is 2.94, you would still have
to roll 2 or better)  But the special damage table doesn't follow this
: instead it seems to round the %age to nearest integer, along with a
few arbitrary cases at the low end of the range (ie a SC of 01-03 are
given a "free" endurance on roll of 01)

Confusing this more are the double/triple chances for magic, which are
written as follows:
-    If the die roll is less than 5% of the Cast Chance, the spell
succeeds with a "triple effect".
-    If the die roll is between 6% and 15% of the Cast Chance, the
spell succeeds with a "double effect".
These rules are described as "less than" rather than "less than or
equal", and there is a grey area in these rules from 5% to 6%
(inclusive) which if reading it correctly, aren't included.

It would be nice to get a concensus for how to really do this, and
perhaps adjust the rules to clarify if necessary.

Options I see are:
1  Use the SC table for both SC and Magic, and change the table to
reflect this and reference it in the rules.
2. Use the rules as written for Combat, but mention that the
percentage OF bc is rounded first.  (most closely matches the table,
but will change the table slightly)
3  Use rules exaclty as written for combat, ie without rounding.


How is this used in reality?  Comments?

Cheers
Neil.


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

--0-2061742153-1226545269=:6733
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Personally I use the table for both, and always expected players in my game=
 to be using the table.=C2=A0 The maths might not quite be right as you poi=
nted out, but it does give the numbers right there, without having to pull =
out a calculator.

I'd go one step further and suggest that further numbers be added to the ta=
ble in some format for aimed missile weapons and we work off the table, ref=
erencing it in each appropriate section.

It's just faster than having to run the numbers yourself everytime, and any=
thing that speeds combat up without badly hurting anything else is good.

From Bernard Hoggins

nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk

--- On Thu, 13/11/08, Neil Davies <nsdavies@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Neil Davies <nsdavies@gmail.com>
Subject: [dq] Doubles and Triples... a definative answer?
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Received: Thursday, 13 November, 2008, 3:46 PM

Hi all,

I've always found the "double/triple" and endurance/spec grev
chances
somewhat unclear, mainly because the table that lists the chances for
endurances & spec grevs does not match up with the the rules.

The combat rules state:
-  "A Strike Check of 15% or less of the Modified Strike Chance
results in damage directly affecting Endurance..."
-  "... a Specific Grievous Injury may occur if the Strike Check is 5%
or less of the Modified Strike Chance."

These rules are clear: the "%or less" statement can take care of any
decimals automatically (eg if 5% of SC is 2.94, you would still have
to roll 2 or better)  But the special damage table doesn't follow this
: instead it seems to round the %age to nearest integer, along with a
few arbitrary cases at the low end of the range (ie a SC of 01-03 are
given a "free" endurance on roll of 01)

Confusing this more are the double/triple chances for magic, which are
written as follows:
-    If the die roll is less than 5% of the Cast Chance, the spell
succeeds with a "triple effect".
-    If the die roll is between 6% and 15% of the Cast Chance, the
spell succeeds with a "double effect".
These rules are described as "less than" rather than "less than
or
equal", and there is a grey area in these rules from 5% to 6%
(inclusive) which if reading it correctly, aren't included.

It would be nice to get a concensus for how to really do this, and
perhaps adjust the rules to clarify if necessary.

Options I see are:
1  Use the SC table for both SC and Magic, and change the table to
reflect this and reference it in the rules.
2. Use the rules as written for Combat, but mention that the
percentage OF bc is rounded first.  (most closely matches the table,
but will change the table slightly)
3  Use rules exaclty as written for combat, ie without rounding.


How is this used in reality?  Comments?

Cheers
Neil.


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
=0A=0A=0A      Find your perfect match today at the new Yahoo!7 Dating. Get=
 Started http://au.dating.yahoo.com/?cid=3D53151&pid=3D1012
--0-2061742153-1226545269=:6733
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<table cellspacing=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" border=3D"0" ><tr><td valign=3D"=
top" style=3D"font: inherit;">Personally I use the table for both, and alwa=
ys expected players in my game to be using the table.&nbsp; The maths might=
 not quite be right as you pointed out, but it does give the numbers right =
there, without having to pull out a calculator.<br><br>I'd go one step furt=
her and suggest that further numbers be added to the table in some format f=
or aimed missile weapons and we work off the table, referencing it in each =
appropriate section.<br><br>It's just faster than having to run the numbers=
 yourself everytime, and anything that speeds combat up without badly hurti=
ng anything else is good.<br><br>From Bernard Hoggins<br>
nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk<br><br>--- On <b>Thu, 13/11/08, Neil Davies <i>&lt;nsd=
avies@gmail.com&gt;</i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style=3D"border-left: 2px=
 solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">From: Neil D=
avies &lt;nsdavies@gmail.com&gt;<br>Subject: [dq] Doubles and Triples... a =
definative answer?<br>To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz<br>Received: Thursday, 13 Novembe=
r, 2008, 3:46 PM<br><br><pre>Hi all,<br><br>I've always found the "double/t=
riple" and endurance/spec grev<br>chances<br>somewhat unclear, mainly becau=
se the table that lists the chances for<br>endurances &amp; spec grevs does=
 not match up with the the rules.<br><br>The combat rules state:<br>-  "A S=
trike Check of 15% or less of the Modified Strike Chance<br>results in dama=
ge directly affecting Endurance..."<br>-  "... a Specific Grievous Injury m=
ay occur if the Strike Check is 5%<br>or less of the Modified Strike Chance=
."<br><br>These rules are clear: the "%or less" statement can take
 care of any<br>decimals automatically (eg if 5% of SC is 2.94, you would s=
till have<br>to roll 2 or better)  But the special damage table doesn't fol=
low this<br>: instead it seems to round the %age to nearest integer, along =
with a<br>few arbitrary cases at the low end of the range (ie a SC of 01-03=
 are<br>given a "free" endurance on roll of 01)<br><br>Confusing this more =
are the double/triple chances for magic, which are<br>written as follows:<b=
r>-    If the die roll is less than 5% of the Cast Chance, the spell<br>suc=
ceeds with a "triple effect".<br>-    If the die roll is between 6% and 15%=
 of the Cast Chance, the<br>spell succeeds with a "double effect".<br>These=
 rules are described as "less than" rather than "less than<br>or<br>equal",=
 and there is a grey area in these rules from 5% to 6%<br>(inclusive) which=
 if reading it correctly, aren't included.<br><br>It would be nice to get a=
 concensus for how to really do this, and<br>perhaps adjust the
 rules to clarify if necessary.<br><br>Options I see are:<br>1  Use the SC =
table for both SC and Magic, and change the table to<br>reflect this and re=
ference it in the rules.<br>2. Use the rules as written for Combat, but men=
tion that the<br>percentage OF bc is rounded first.  (most closely matches =
the table,<br>but will change the table slightly)<br>3  Use rules exaclty a=
s written for combat, ie without rounding.<br><br><br>How is this used in r=
eality?  Comments?<br><br>Cheers<br>Neil.<br><br><br>-- to unsubscribe noti=
fy mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --<br></pre></blockquote></td></tr></tabl=
e><br>=0A=0A=0A=0A      <p class=3D"MsoNormal"> </p>=0A=0A  <tbody><tr>=0A=
=0A    <td style=3D"padding: 0.75pt;">=0A=0A    <div class=3D"MsoNormal" st=
yle=3D"text-align: center;" align=3D"center"><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"3=
"><span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">=0A=0A    <hr align=3D"center" size=3D"1=
" width=3D"100%">=0A=0A    </span></font></div>=0A=0A =0A=0A      <p class=
=3D"MsoNormal"><img id=3D"_x0000_i1026" src=3D"http://l.yimg.com/au.yimg.co=
m/i/mktg/images/heartcircle(25x25).jpg" align=3D"absbottom" border=3D"0" he=
ight=3D"25" hspace=3D"4" width=3D"25"><font face=3D"Arial" size=3D"2">Searc=
h 1000&#39;s of available singles in your area at the new Yahoo!7 Dating. <=
span style=3D"font-size: 10pt;"><a href=3D"http://au.rd.yahoo.com/dating/ma=
il/tagline2/*http://au.dating.yahoo.com/?cid=3D53151&pid=3D1012" target=3D"=
_new"><b><span style=3D"font-weight: bold;" lang=3D"NO-BOK"></span></b><spa=
n lang=3D"NO-BOK">Get Started. </span></a> =0A        </span></font><span l=
ang=3D"NO-BOK"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
--0-2061742153-1226545269=:6733--


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

------=_Part_24624_13576736.1226548841584
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Neil Davies <nsdavies@gmail.com> wrote:

> These rules are described as "less than" rather than "less than or equal",
> and there is a grey area in these rules from 5% to 6% (inclusive) which if
> reading it correctly, aren't included.


Uh huh... so if a spell has a 100% Cast Chance and the player rolls 05
then.... it being not less than 5%, nor between 6% and 15%... their heads
explode (special no resist backfire result).  :-)


> How is this used in reality?  Comments?


I think we can safely assume that the 5 and 15 numbers work the same for
magic and non-magic and that some numeracy-challenged original author was
involved.

If the table is never worse than a non-rounded 5 or 15 (e.g. if it can round
the 2.94 of your example to 3, but never rounds, say, 5.5. to 4) then
calculating and truncating rather than using the table will never give an
advantage, (a character / game advantage... it may give a speed of play
advantage over looking up a table), and the table can be consulted for exact
answers if needed.

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_24624_13576736.1226548841584
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Neil Davies <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:nsdavies@gmail.com">nsdavies@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
These rules are described as &quot;less than&quot; rather than &quot;less than or equal&quot;, and there is a grey area in these rules from 5% to 6% (inclusive) which if reading it correctly, aren&#39;t included.</blockquote>
<div><br>Uh huh... so if a spell has a 100% Cast Chance and the player rolls 05 then.... it being not less than 5%, nor between 6% and 15%... their heads explode (special no resist backfire result).&nbsp; :-)<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
How is this used in reality? &nbsp;Comments?</blockquote><div><br>I think we can safely assume that the 5 and 15 numbers work the same
for magic and non-magic and that some numeracy-challenged original
author was involved.<br><br>If the table is never worse than a non-rounded 5 or 15 (e.g. if it can round the 2.94 of your example to 3, but never rounds, say, 5.5. to 4) then calculating and truncating rather than using the table will never give an advantage, (a character / game advantage... it may give a speed of play advantage over looking up a table), and the table can be consulted for exact answers if needed.<br>
<br>Cheers,<br>Martin<br></div></div><br>

------=_Part_24624_13576736.1226548841584--


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

On 13/11/2008, at 15:46 , Neil Davies wrote:

> 1  Use the SC table for both SC and Magic, and change the table to
> reflect this and reference it in the rules.

This is how I have always used these rules.

Clare


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

The 'doubles' table is the same as the clear intent of the other parts of
the rules, if you round standardly (exactly half, round-up). For instance,
if you enter a formula of [MyBaseChance] * 5% (or 15%) then Excel gives the
same answer as the table, except in the special case of 01 being an
Endurance/Double if you have a 1%-3% chance.

I take the table to override the numerical formulae for low values (1-3%),
and the formulae to override the table for tables over 136% - i.e. 15% of
200 is 30. This is what I have generally seen played, although some GMs (Jon
McS?) play that the table overrides the formulae - you never double on more
than a 20.

It might be good to get this last bit clarified, and maybe to
change/standardise the wording for combat/magic.

<slightly defensive>

By the way, the table and the different wording of combat & magic have
always been this way, its not just something that poor editing introduced
(although perhaps good editing would have sorted it out):

* Section 25 of the original (1981) rules says: "When the Strike Check is
15% or less of the Modified Strike Chance, any damage ... These percentages
are summarised on the Special Damage Chart (rule 25.2)." Section 25.2 says
"The Special Damage Table (rule 25.6) lists modified Strike Chances and
their damage directly affecting Endurance range." Section 25.6 is the
Special Damage Chart 57.2 that we all know and love.

* Section 43 of the original (1981) rules says: "If the dice roll is 5% or
less of the Cast Chance governing the cast, the effect of the spell is
tripled. If the die roll is between 6% and 15%... The Special Damage Table
lists the dice rolls producing double or triple damage."

</slightly defensive>

Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of Neil
Davies
Sent: Thursday, 13 November 2008 3:46 p.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: [dq] Doubles and Triples... a definative answer?

Hi all,

I've always found the "double/triple" and endurance/spec grev chances
somewhat unclear, mainly because the table that lists the chances for
endurances & spec grevs does not match up with the the rules.

The combat rules state:
-  "A Strike Check of 15% or less of the Modified Strike Chance
results in damage directly affecting Endurance..."
-  "... a Specific Grievous Injury may occur if the Strike Check is 5%
or less of the Modified Strike Chance."

These rules are clear: the "%or less" statement can take care of any
decimals automatically (eg if 5% of SC is 2.94, you would still have
to roll 2 or better)  But the special damage table doesn't follow this
: instead it seems to round the %age to nearest integer, along with a
few arbitrary cases at the low end of the range (ie a SC of 01-03 are
given a "free" endurance on roll of 01)

Confusing this more are the double/triple chances for magic, which are
written as follows:
-    If the die roll is less than 5% of the Cast Chance, the spell
succeeds with a "triple effect".
-    If the die roll is between 6% and 15% of the Cast Chance, the
spell succeeds with a "double effect".
These rules are described as "less than" rather than "less than or
equal", and there is a grey area in these rules from 5% to 6%
(inclusive) which if reading it correctly, aren't included.

It would be nice to get a concensus for how to really do this, and
perhaps adjust the rules to clarify if necessary.

Options I see are:
1  Use the SC table for both SC and Magic, and change the table to
reflect this and reference it in the rules.
2. Use the rules as written for Combat, but mention that the
percentage OF bc is rounded first.  (most closely matches the table,
but will change the table slightly)
3  Use rules exaclty as written for combat, ie without rounding.


How is this used in reality?  Comments?

Cheers
Neil.


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

[Oh dear top-posting has taken over the world]

On 13/11/2008, at 18:17 , Andrew Withy wrote:

> I take the table to override the numerical formulae for low values  
> (1-3%),
> and the formulae to override the table for tables over 136% - i.e.  
> 15% of
> 200 is 30. This is what I have generally seen played, although some  
> GMs (Jon
> McS?) play that the table overrides the formulae - you never double  
> on more
> than a 20.

John McSpadden is the only one I am sure plays it that way. I don't  
really mind which way we decide to go with the high numbers.

cheers,

Clare


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

I have a one year job in Sydney, starting very soon I only know one 
family in the city, not very close to where I'll be working. If anyone 
knows some friendly roleplayers/boardgamers/medievalists/SF fans in 
Sydney, an introduction would be much appreciated.

Michael Woodhams.


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --