Save Throws: d20 or 3d6?

[oldkat]

My Men & Magic book, p.20 doesn't state which is the suggested method.
Does yours?
If not, which do you utilize?

Inspection of the table as it is, is very revealing of something: how tough the game can be; if 3d6 is your preferred method.
If a d20 is used, 1st level characters have a 20-25% chance against Dragon Breath of avoiding the maximum possible.
But if 3d6 is used, those same characters have but from 12-17% chance (roughly) of doing the same.

(Doing my Samuel Jackson voice:)
What's in your Dragon Breath?

[Deleted]

Gary, Dave, and Rob used a d20, if the actions of the first 3 D&D refs matter.

[mindcontrolsquid]

Plus the d20 allows for greater variance of results, whereas the 3d6 tends towards more of a bell curve. Keeps things more unpredictable, if you ask me.

[Deleted]

uuuhhhhh..... 5% per step, integers, uniform. No less predictable. Different odds, yes, but 100% predicatable.

[spacelem]

Saving Throws are a binary success/failure. If the probability of success is p, then the variance of the number of successes in n rolls is np(1-p), so you maximise the variance by choosing p=0.5, i.e. make it a coin toss. Or you can minimise the variance by making it an auto pass (or fail).

*cough*

That said, I like the d20. Actually I've never thought of doing it a different way, whereas I'm using "2d6+something, roll to impress me" as my "that needs a roll but I don't think there's a rule for it" mechanic (except when I use d20 under stat, because I'm quite scatter brained and like a change now and then).

[oldkat]

Dec 10, 2015 23:14:48 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Gary, Dave, and Rob used a d20, if the actions of the first 3 D&D refs matter.

Okay.
But did they pick it?
Or did it pick them?

[waysoftheearth]

M&T p38 says (re: Saving Throws for Magical Items): "Roll with a twenty-sided die."

[oldkat]

That it does.
But only if you want to make the player have to roll for the item at all. It suggests that magical items just survive, in general.

[waysoftheearth]

Chainmail also has the original saving throws on 2d6

See, for example, DRAGONS (p35) "Dragon fire will kill any opponent it touches, except another Dragon, Super Hero, or a Wizard, who is saved on a two dice roll of 7 or better."

Seemingly generous that it only kills opponents!

[Zenopus]

The description for Feeblemind (page 30 of Vol 1), says:

"Because of its specialized nature the Feeblemind spell has a 20% better chance of success, i.e. lowers the Magic-Users saving throw against magic by 4, so that if normally a
12 or better were required to save against magic, a 16 would be required against a Feeblemind."

The equivalence of -4 to -20% only works if the roll is on a d20.

Also, we have Prayer in Greyhawk: "It lowers the saving throws of those within the area by 5% (1 point) plus 5% for every ten levels the Cleric has gained, i.e. an 11th level Cleric lowers the saving throws by 10%, and at 21st level it would jump to 15%."

Here we have a direct statement of the equivalence between 5% and 1 point.

[oldkat]

I'll accept the Feeblemind description into evidence that would support a d20. But why this tail is wagging the dog instead of just making clear in the table itself is just another of the wonderful zanyness we get with OD&D.
It should be noted also that CM was the go to source for (fill in the blank) when a particular instance was not detailed-out in the LBBs.
GH is another kettle of fish altogether. By this time, EGG had changed the HD per class, and a lot of mechanics. But if one is going strictly by the '74 books, it is not as crystal clear (to me) that CM is over ridden. Not by 1 spell description. If more evidence surfaces, I will be inclined to yield.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2015 15:50:50 GMT -6 oldkat said:

I'll accept the Feeblemind description into evidence that would support a d20. But why this tail is wagging the dog instead of just making clear in the table itself is just another of the wonderful zanyness we get with OD&D.
It should be noted also that CM was the go to source for (fill in the blank) when a particular instance was not detailed-out in the LBBs.
GH is another kettle of fish altogether. By this time, EGG had changed the HD per class, and a lot of mechanics. But if one is going strictly by the '74 books, it is not as crystal clear (to me) that CM is over ridden. Not by 1 spell description. If more evidence surfaces, I will be inclined to yield.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

[Stormcrow]

Dec 13, 2015 15:50:50 GMT -6 oldkat said:

But why this tail is wagging the dog instead of just making clear in the table itself

Because it's so blindingly obvious that Gygax didn't even think about having to explain it?

[oldkat]

Dec 14, 2015 14:10:56 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Dec 13, 2015 15:50:50 GMT -6 oldkat said:

I'll accept the Feeblemind description into evidence that would support a d20. But why this tail is wagging the dog instead of just making clear in the table itself is just another of the wonderful zanyness we get with OD&D.
It should be noted also that CM was the go to source for (fill in the blank) when a particular instance was not detailed-out in the LBBs.
GH is another kettle of fish altogether. By this time, EGG had changed the HD per class, and a lot of mechanics. But if one is going strictly by the '74 books, it is not as crystal clear (to me) that CM is over ridden. Not by 1 spell description. If more evidence surfaces, I will be inclined to yield.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

Which part was wrong?
Please explain why.

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2015 14:46:06 GMT -6 oldkat said:

Which part was wrong?
Please explain why.

imgur.com/a/QDbyt#3


There is not a single authentic source ANYWHERE that even suggests 3d18 was used. You're pulling it totally out of your a$$.

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2015 14:16:00 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

Dec 13, 2015 15:50:50 GMT -6 oldkat said:

But why this tail is wagging the dog instead of just making clear in the table itself

Because it's so blindingly obvious that Gygax didn't even think about having to explain it?

Especially after I pointed out that a d20 is, in fact, what Gary actually used.

[oldkat]

"Inspection of the table as it is, is very revealing of something: how tough the game can be; if 3d6 is your preferred method.
If a d20 is used, 1st level characters have a 20-25% chance against Dragon Breath of avoiding the maximum possible.
But if 3d6 is used, those same characters have but from 12-17% chance (roughly) of doing the same."

Here's my original post. I use alot of "ifs"--if one wants to know exactly what I wrote.
My comparison is, I think, kind of revealing of the fact that the d20 Save Throw is more "forgiving" than using 3d6.
I don't see anywhere in here where I state/d that Gary, or Dave or Rob ever used 3d6. I accept your recollections that they used a d20; something I think all of us have assumed for decades, considering that's how most of us have been playing it ourselves as well.

"But why this tail is wagging the dog instead of just making clear in the table itself is just another of the wonderful zaniness we get with OD&D." This does not claim that the mechanic (the d20) doesn't exist, just the way it appears in the book. Also, aren't there multiple references to go back to CM to find (the whatever), in the LBBs?

"But if one is going strictly by the '74 books, it is not as crystal clear (to me) that CM is over ridden. Not by 1 spell description. If more evidence surfaces, I will be inclined to yield." 1 spell mentions (not a d20) but a -4 or 20% component; as pointed out, this is only possible if using a d20, yet the mention of "Use a d20 for Saving Throw" rolls is not mention (in the table in my book). So on one hand there is no such indication, and on the other, there is a minor mention in 1 spell. The BTB analysis is an observation, only. If one looks at what is actually written, as opposed to what some folks knew, back there, back then, it is hard to see anything definitive about a d20 mentioned in regard to Saves, but for the 1 spell. Back in 1974, most of us did not even know what the hell D&D was, let alone what was "so blindingly obvious" that it didn't need explaining. Now, with years of experience with the game, we know; or some of us think we do.

I appreciate knowing how things might have been from those there at the time.

I also appreciate healthy, constructive counter arguments.

I'll let it go at that.

[Deleted]

imgur.com/a/QDbyt#7

[oldkat]

I'm not sure, Mike, if there is a bit of jesting involved here, or something else.
Your links are great; some "good to know" principles.. But for some reason, I have a suspicion you and I are not discussing the same matters.
On the surface, you appear to be hand waving, boo hooing the point of my question on something like (correct me if I'm wrong)--I was there. This is how "we" did it.
Which is fine to know, but has absolutely not a thing to do with what I query in the OP.
Nor with the fact of the printed matter vs. the understood (by a few, back then)way.

[Deleted]

There is absolutely ZERO evidence ANYWHERE for anything other than a d20. You are quite literally making a textbook argument from silence.

[oldkat]

What exactly am I arguing?
1. My copy of M&M does not list a d20 anywhere around the saving throw table.
2. I asked if anyone else's, did.
3. If one compares the probability of surviving dragon breath, the d20 offers more of a chance than 3d6.
None of that is arguing that 3d6 was the used mechanic. I simply inquired if anyone had used/or was using 3d6 instead of d20.

All the rest is just a bit of rambling thought, a kind of "suppose..." and "what ifs"...
Its nice to have folks that were there at the time, who can offer their recollections as to how things were played by whom, and in what campaign.

[sepulchre]

oldkat, you don't have to provide an apologetic; it's not a jest, it's just his way of making himself feel important. Your question is entirely valid; nonetheless, I think Stormcrow and Gronan have it. Waysofthearth's response is going to be your middle ground.

[increment]

Dec 15, 2015 13:21:42 GMT -6 oldkat said:

What exactly am I arguing?
1. My copy of M&M does not list a d20 anywhere around the saving throw table.
2. I asked if anyone else's, did.
3. If one compares the probability of surviving dragon breath, the d20 offers more of a chance than 3d6.
None of that is arguing that 3d6 was the used mechanic. I simply inquired if anyone had used/or was using 3d6 instead of d20.

All the rest is just a bit of rambling thought, a kind of "suppose..." and "what ifs"...
Its nice to have folks that were there at the time, who can offer their recollections as to how things were played by whom, and in what campaign.

While Mr. Mornard and others are surely correct that d20 was the intended roll for saving throws in published D&D, there are good reasons to think that early drafts of the game used 3d6 for saving throws, and as well that early players sometimes used 3d6 for saves given the lack of clear guidance in M&M. 2d10 (well, rolling two d20's each with the faces 0-9 twice and adding the results) was also popular with confused early players for both saving throws and to-hit rolls.

[waysoftheearth]

Funky dice were not necessarily easy to come by in the early days, so folks would have made do with whatever they had on hand.

I can distinctly remember not having the necessary dice myself, when I got my first D&D set. I spent a good while trying to figure out how to best roll weird number ranges with the six-sided dice I did have.

[scottyg]

Dec 15, 2015 13:21:42 GMT -6 oldkat said:

What exactly am I arguing?
1. My copy of M&M does not list a d20 anywhere around the saving throw table.
2. I asked if anyone else's, did.
3. If one compares the probability of surviving dragon breath, the d20 offers more of a chance than 3d6.
None of that is arguing that 3d6 was the used mechanic. I simply inquired if anyone had used/or was using 3d6 instead of d20.

All the rest is just a bit of rambling thought, a kind of "suppose..." and "what ifs"...
Its nice to have folks that were there at the time, who can offer their recollections as to how things were played by whom, and in what campaign.

This seems disingenuous after the multiple counter statements you made after pro-d20 posts, including "If more evidence surfaces, I will be inclined to yield".

[Mike]

Roll 3 six-siders for Saving Throws and combat BUT re-roll doubles and trebles and add to the first roll. I have no idea what it does to the math but it makes for pretty exciting play.

[cadriel]

I brought this up elsewhere, but in the analysis aldarron did of Dalluhn / Beyond This Point Be Dragons (he calls it BTPBD) he says of saving throws:

TABLE 16: SAVING THROWS
BTPBD uses 3d6. Unique to BTPBD, Death Ray and Poison are separate categories, thus making 6 save categories. The categories also have two differences in names. These are; Spells (not Spells and Staves) and Stone (not paralyzation). Many, but not all, of the numbers are the same.

So I'm curious what folks here, especially @gronanofsimmerya , think of that.

[aldarron]

We've had this discussion before. Please look at this thread Saving Throw Dice

Yes, it is true that the BTPbD/Dalluhn Mss. says "SAVING THROWS*......*Use 3 Dice" (Book I:8) I'd just point out that what is written there doesn't tell us anything definitive one way or another about what dice Gary may or may not have been using in his home game.

[oldkat]

A great link, Aldarron; at least we've confirmed that others have discussed this before my mentioning it. Kudos.
Given that, and please don't anybody take this the wrong way, but, the point of this thread isn't what Gary, or Dave, or Rob used (or what Rob might still use), because it has been said, through those that knew, that Gary and/or Dave didn't always play according to what was written for us, the gamer-public.
The whole point is about the d20 vs 3d6 for Saves; the former being more...friendly...to the players/characters than 3d6. But since it doesn't undeniably list a d20 anywhere around the Save table, the question became--which do you use/prefer? (Perhaps I didn't articulate that as well as I should have.)
So all the sideline debates are kind of muddying the point.