A simple rule for thieving skills was introduced in Delving Deeper: each attempt succeeds on roll greater than three on a d6. However, its simplicity also takes away the empowering feel of advancement. Jack's suggestion of always using the Hear Noise column keeps the simplicity (only one number needs to be kept in mind for all skills) and the advancement of skills.
Brendan's sole problem with this approach was that it makes distinguishing between "no progress and catastrophe". He apparently ruled that, with percentile skills, failures simply mean no progress, while rolls 96+ result in a critical failure (as with a natural one on a d20).
To circumvent this problem, I propose the following: when a failure is rolled (according to the Hear Noise column), another d6 should be checked, and on a roll of 6 a catastrophe occurs. I have put the chances of such critical failure into this chart:
Level
|
Hear Noise
|
Catastrophe
|
1-2
|
1-2
|
11.11%
|
3-6
|
1-3
|
8.33%
|
7-10
|
1-4
|
5.56%
|
11-12
|
1-5
|
2.78%
|
13-14
|
1-6
|
0%
|
It is obvious that there is a higher probability for catastrophes than in Brendan's original house rule; however, it also scales with level. The only downside of this that I can see is that it involves another roll, albeit a pretty straightforward one.
Very reasonable. I kind of like how the chance of fumble also decreases with level.
ReplyDeleteI agree, and now I want to find other places to make fumbles decrease with level.
ReplyDeleteIf the extra roll isn't too strenuous, it could be implemented quite successfully. I'm about to leave the house, so I will have to do the maths later.
DeleteWith d20, it could alternatively be tied to missing the target number by a certain degree (similar to how scorpion men's sting attack works: either on a 20 or scoring greater than AC by 4 or more).