Topic: Ideas for fast multiple roll resolution?

[Dark Schneider]

There are cases where we need 3 rolls, for example 'spell mastery - SCSM - spell attack roll'.

If a charcter has high bonus in those skills, it usually want to use them everytime, then, if those skills bonuses are enough high, do you see correct don't require rolls and allow it directly use the effect?.

For example, a character has +131 in spell mastery and +50 in SCSM for a certain list, it only needs to roll 10 for success if it wants to double (-20 mod) an effect, could the GM think that the character can cast spells from that list directly with doubling an effect?
See that character could see enough to use the 'almost success' result, doing the 90% of effect (effect x 1'8 ) and loosing 10 HP.

So, we remove the fumble (not for spell attack) risk, but in the other side we accelerate the gameplay.

In the example I use a roll of 10 as 'ignore roll', but in the case of doing that, I'd like to know the opinion of a good/balanced 'ignoring roll' quantity (maybe 05?). We could call it AUTOROLL.

So, the idea is to allow to player choose the option of autoroll, allowing to choose between 'almost success' or success result depending its skill bonus. I see 05 as good/balanced/conservative and 10 as good/generous.

Maybe a complete example could be clear (using the 05 autoroll):

We have a charcater with +105 in spell mastery and +21 in SCSM for a list, the charcater could choose to cast directly spells with an (effect x 1'8 ) loosing 10 HP and with 1 round of delay. Why?:

- spell mastery: almost success for double an effect is 110 (90 + 20), 'almost success' is 90% of success but lose 10 HP.
- SCSM: with a result of 26 we cast the spell with 1 round delay and taking 50% of activity that round.

If character has +125 could choose between (effect x 2,7 and -10 HP) of (effect x 2), I am using our 'spell mastery' that has a -20 penalty for any X increment (-20 x2, -40 x3...), so an 'almost success' for triple effect is (90 + 40 = 130).

This can be used for ANY skill, but I used 'spell mastery' case because is complex and the option is used in various layers.

[Arioch]

If an action has a low failure probability and the PC is in a non combat situation, we usually don't roll for it (sometimes we don't roll even in combat  ), but this option seems interesting and worh a try, I'll see what my players have to say!

[mocking bird]

Another option could be to increase the fumble range by SM penalties/10 for such high SM skills.  Little math required & eliminate a roll.

[RandalThor]

Another option (for quickness) is to apply the modifiers to the actual SCSM roll, modified by their skill in Spell Mastery for that spell list. In this method, you use Spell Mastery like Stunned Maneuvering; the bonus is subtracted from the modifier for whatever they are attempting. Only I would have the advancement either restricted or special like alertness (+1/rank). At no time would I allow it to result in a positive modifier to the SCSM. And I would also use the increased fumble range Mocking Bird mentioned, only I would aply the unaltered modifier/10 number (i.e., -30 = +3 to fumble range).

[markc]

 IMO you could do it if you rewrite how the skills work with spell casting and by varrying the required roll of sucess. So for the above example IMO you would have the sucess roll for x1.8 being 140 instaed of 111. [The number is just off the top of my head but IMO it sould be about double the penalt in the book]. Then rewrite how SM and spell rank bonus works with casting and you are done.

But IMO you should really test it for a long time to see if it drasticly unbalances the game or is too week.

Also remember that as a GM you can change the system any time you want. If adjusting how SM works is ok with the others then do it. But also remember that what is good for the PC is also good for the NPC and it can come back to bite you fairly easyily.

MDC

edit: I also seam to remember some rules in War Law[RM2] for handeling multiple rolls etc to handel mass combat. You might want to take a look at it or any other mass combat system you might have to see if you could adapt it to your problem.
MDC

[Dark Schneider]

I thought some time, and I concluded that maybe an autoroll of 10 is good, why?, think about skills as quickdraw, once a character has a bonus of >100 is not rare don't require rolling for success, so if the bonus is +101, and autoroll is 10 we have the success 111 result.

For not player abuse, you could require roll sometimes and with no previous advice, so the possibility of fumble is not removed, but for faster playing, only 'sometimes'.