Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: VTD going to switch to 1d20

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #1

  • jedibcg
  • jedibcg's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • 9th Level
  • Supporter
  • What is personal text?
  • Posts: 9678

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for the computations. Keep in mind the Wizard can do double that damage if two monsters are in the room. Also, VTD needs to go to 1d20 as we are having way too many Crits. Stay tuned.

Jeff mentioned this in MEC thread that I think needs its own thread.

I 100% support moving away from the d10+1. HOWEVER moving to a pure d20 model is not the right answer either for VTD, imo.

In TD sliding the chancing of sliding a 1 or 2 are NOT equal to the chances of sliding a 19 or 20 and are not the same as 11 or 12. I don't know what it should be, but I think probably more of something like a bell curve with 1 and 20 at the ends and X number in the middle (not saying it should be 10 or 11 because I don't know). Just that evenly randomized d20 is also not the direction that VTD should go.
You either discover a star or you don't. You arrogant punk.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by jedibcg.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #2

Honestly, I could see a world where D20 is the ideal situation for VTD. Maybe rolling a natural 1-5 would automatically miss on Nightmare, etc. There is no easy way to factor in skill for slides, so straight up D20 rolls seems the best option. Would definitely allow for more misses.

I posted in a thread between V1a and V1b about making a D100 roll transfer to a D20 calculation, so they can decide which rolls would be more likely (like your bell curve idea), but it wasn't met well. Many others came up with similar ones.

I'm OK with pretty much any change that removes the d10+10.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #3

I'd be fine with a flat D20, sure, it's not a perfect representation of physical True Dungeon. But 10% miss, 10% of each of 12-20 isn't a perfect representation either.

I think d20 is closer to reality than 10+d10 and a rolled 1 is a miss.

I might make it scale a bit at different difficulties, such as:

normal: the greater of 8 or d20, but a rolled 1 is a miss
hardcore: the greater of 4 or a d20, but a rolled 1 is a miss
nightmare, epic: d20

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #4

Rough numbers from the Maralith board (as far as I'm aware, the only board that TD has published online):

Slide% of area
201.1%
192.3%
182.3%
174.4%
165.4%
152.2%
144.6%
132.5%
122.2%
112.3%
104.9%
95.6%
83.7%
73.6%
65.5%
54.7%
48.1%
38.1%
25.2%
13.4%
Outside18.1%

My process:
  • Grabbed Maralith image from PHB/DMG (I don't remember which)
  • Colorized the areas representing different hit values (this is pretty time consuming. I had done it already for a different reason)
  • Used Paint.net to count the area covered by a color
  • Turned the areas into percentages

Yes, I realize there is error inherent in the process, and it does not account for sliding capability. It is just an attempt to put some actual numbers to just one example board. I know that deciding what value to 'count' the area between two numbers is somewhat a judgement call, I tried to split it as closely as I could. I also know that the amount of "outside" the target to include in the calculation is also somewhat subject to debate.

So I've attached the images I used. And here is the Google Sheet I used for the calculations. Feel free to copy it and adjust the amount of "off" to your liking.

This message has attachments images.
Please log in or register to see it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Fiddy.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #5

I would agree that a pure d20 model wouldn't be perfect, but it's a good first step.

To me, the ideal situation would take advantage of greatly expanded to hit tables, since it's all electronic anyhow. I get that there's very limited developer and QA time on this, so I certainly wouldn't want to push the app developers beyond their ability to support changes!

But, in ideal world, I would love to see a progression of:
-Flat d20
-Generic weighted To Hit; something like the bell curve biased a bit above the middle
-Monster-specific weighted To Hit - DM tells players to select "monster V2a-2" or some such
-Class- and monster-specific weighted To Hit (account for dual sliders)
-Networking so the DM can "push" the appropriate "board" to the players
-Networking, but some rudimentary "path analysis" of the virtual "puck" that simulate bumps

Regardless of what ends up happening, there probably should be some upper limit on the number of allowable crits per round via natural 20's. When there's only room enough on a physical board for 1-2 pucks on a 20 spot, that should get reflected virtually somehow.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #6

Are there any computer programmers in here who could even make a little mini game? Maybe a virtual shuffle board?
I play Wizard.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #7

Not sure there is a perfect solution and don't think anything virtual is going to equal sliding. In general, I think going to d20 is an improvement, just not sure how much.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #8

Anthony Barnstable wrote: Are there any computer programmers in here who could even make a little mini game? Maybe a virtual shuffle board?


Yes, this is not a small effort for the complexities of puck size, puck interactions, and changes between VTD adventures. To do it right would not be cheap and easy, and would fluctuate VTD prices.

What about averaging 2d20, outliers would be lower, including 20s and 1s, and the middle ground would be more likely. It could also be a 1d10+10 averaged with 1d20 which would do a bell curve over the 13 or so rather than 15 of the current system. I haven’t used my statistics or set theory in a while, it seems like a mathematician could create a decent model that would allow for similar statistics that Fiddy threw out without requiring a lot of programming. One thing fiddy may not have accounted for was the puck space around the higher values, 20’s are actually the space on the board and all puck touching spaces around the 20, and higher numbers all have this advantage during in-person true dungeon.
--
macXdmg
Monk of the Painda Order
Bard of the College of Sick Beats

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #9

In VTD, the board could be approiximated using a d100 for rolling to Hit.

For each monster TD could make ranges that would approximate the area of the physical board.

Example:
Location:_D100____D20 value
Head____97-100___20
Head____90-93____19
R Arm___80-84____18
L Arm___75-79____17
Torso____66-74____16
Torso____56-65____15
Torso____24-55____14
R Leg____23-34____13
L Leg____16-18____12
Miss____1-15, 19-22, 35-45, 85-89, 94-96____1


Here is the hard part: the GM would need to convert the D100 to a D20 value to tell the player if the d100 roll hit.

The App could do the conversion, but the app would have to know the monster in the combat and the d100 hit table. That seems a lot for a free app. But I am no developer, just a software analyst.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #10

  • jedibcg
  • jedibcg's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • 9th Level
  • Supporter
  • What is personal text?
  • Posts: 9678

macxdmg wrote:

Anthony Barnstable wrote: Are there any computer programmers in here who could even make a little mini game? Maybe a virtual shuffle board?


Yes, this is not a small effort for the complexities of puck size, puck interactions, and changes between VTD adventures. To do it right would not be cheap and easy, and would fluctuate VTD prices.

What about averaging 2d20, outliers would be lower, including 20s and 1s, and the middle ground would be more likely. It could also be a 1d10+10 averaged with 1d20 which would do a bell curve over the 13 or so rather than 15 of the current system. I haven’t used my statistics or set theory in a while, it seems like a mathematician could create a decent model that would allow for similar statistics that Fiddy threw out without requiring a lot of programming. One thing fiddy may not have accounted for was the puck space around the higher values, 20’s are actually the space on the board and all puck touching spaces around the 20, and higher numbers all have this advantage during in-person true dungeon.


That is very valid. Maybe then the simpliest (not the one I like) is a d20+1. 1's still being a miss of course. This is to compensate for sliding a puck that lands on X and X+1. You get the X+1 in PTD. I still think a sliding distribution is better with an adjusted bell curve (not a true bell curve) but I don't know if that is harder than a d20+1 for the app makers.
You either discover a star or you don't. You arrogant punk.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #11

macxdmg wrote: I haven’t used my statistics or set theory in a while, it seems like a mathematician could create a decent model that would allow for similar statistics that Fiddy threw out without requiring a lot of programming. One thing fiddy may not have accounted for was the puck space around the higher values, 20’s are actually the space on the board and all puck touching spaces around the 20, and higher numbers all have this advantage during in-person true dungeon.


Correct. It gets somewhat accounted for by virtue of how thick the lines between areas are on this particular board, and me splitting that area between the two numbers, but my percentages are by no means a full answer. They're intended only to take a step towards using some real information. My next step (if I find time) would be a python script to walk the board with a circle the size of a puck, masking off the area covered and checking the highest value inside the circle. Still wouldn't take into account the skill of the player, or the interaction of multiple pucks, but I suspect we'll be out of quarantine before a solution for that gets implemented.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

VTD going to switch to 1d20 7 months 1 week ago #12

I would think 2d10 would give an appropriate curve while also providing the appx 1% crit area as measured by Fiddy. That would be fewer Crits than I normally see on my runs, but at the same time it would be dramatically fewer instances of the puck going off the back or falling way short.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.215 seconds