Why is d% the best system?

Why is d% the best system?

>Realistic hardcap of skills - no bullshit monsters with AC of 73
>easy to understand probability
>realistic hit point values - no 600 HP behemoths
>modular, skill-based, no class limitations

BRP, Dark Heresy, Call of Cthulhu, Mythras, Runequest, Delta Green, it's all good.

>realistic hit point values
This is such an inane statement that I can't even.

First of all, d% is not a system, it's a die.
BRP is a system, which coincidentally is the same used in all the other games you mention (except Dark Heresy). But that's just one. Unknown Armies, for example, uses a d% for resolution too, but it's a very different game from the others you mention.

Second, you make the common mistake of considering things in a void, when really it's all relative. 73 AC and 600 HP are big numbers, but they are not necessarily out of scale in the context of their system. It's like taking World of Darkness, which has skills that scale 1 to 5, and saying that d% skills that go up to 99 are too high.

tl;dr: nice opinions, bruh.

>when you make the right argument but credit Scientology with the research

>D20 multiplied by 5
>Better than anything

I mean, it's not a super coincidence that all these hard hitting systems use d%. It's Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, the mackdaddy of good shit, showing it's DNA.

Anyone could put together capeshit or high fantasy in d%, but they don't because they remember how good it felt playing a game that didn't hold your hand, that tore off your arm while fighting a demon that a D&D character wouldn't think twice about.

I'll add Harnmaster. Rolemaster is a bit iffy but it's roll-high open-ended so it doesn't count.

>Anyone could put together capeshit or high fantasy in d%, but they don't
He doesn't know that Marvel Super Heroes is the best superheroes game ever made. Add it to the list of based games, OP.

It's arbitrary but 1-100 makes more sense for us than abstract measurements like you need a a number or more un a 20 sided die to hit

Here's a question for y'all: is there a GOOD way to do degrees of success in d100? A flat roll with no bell curve tends to produce fuckwad results.

Yeah, you can: any successful roll that is divisible by 2 (even number) is better than a normal success. If it is divisible by 5 instead, it's another step better. If it's divisble by 10 it's yet another step better.

I have the same chance to hit a rat as I do the broadside of a barn.
/thread

That's explicitly wrong in every d% system I've read, even the absolute worst of them. What terrible games have you been looking at?

d100 is the numerically superior dice resolution. It is 5 times better than d20, 5,55 times better than 3d6, and 8,33 times better than 2d6.
Mathematically this makes a game like BRP 18,88 times better than D&D, GURPS and AW all combined.

he probably has only had pleb GMs that made their players roll against base skill value all the frickin' time

Top-shelf, user.

100 is also arbitrary.

It’s pretty true when HP means meat points and it takes a good hit by basically anything and you risk dying.

>>realistic hit point values - no 600 HP behemoths


wut?

Because you're apparently irrationally afraid of unisystem and gurps and therefore havent evaluated your better choices.

>It’s pretty true when HP means meat points and it takes a good hit by basically anything and you risk dying.
You seem to have entered into the argument with the idea that every system emulates combat wounds using dice with a total value of less than 20. A 600-HP monster doesn't mean much in a system where you deal damage equal to your Strength score x10 and your PC has an 18 STR.

No, I meant in comparison to damage. A healthy character in Mythras would have like 4HP for their head and limbs and a two-handed sword would deal 2d6. Plate armor could absorb like 8 points of damage from a hit. You didn’t die until -4HP, but you would be badly injured with a concussion or broken bone in negative health.

So if a system used bigger numbers for similar effect, then it still has realistic feeling HP.

no statistical distribution, pack'er up bois

Never understood this argument.

False.
d120 is mathematically superior.

>120 is 1.2 times better than 100

>d120 is largest number of symmetrical faces possible for an icosahedron. It's a geometrically perfect shape.
>d100 is just a fucking golf ball with numbers on it. It's not even a fucking real shape.

>120 has 16 divisors. Can be used to simulate a d2, d3, d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, or d20. Literally your entire dice bag can be replaced by a d120. It has so many divisors, mathematicians call it a "colossally abundant" number.
>100 only has 9 divisors. Can't even simulate a d6. It's not even "superabundant".

Binary success/fail doesn't care about distribution. Any sort of system in which degrees of success are considered does.

I'm pretty sure there's some six hundred hp behemoths in a few DH splats. Titans and the GUO gotta come close, anyway.

You're not making sense.

D100 is just d20 for hipsters
>easy to understand probability
If you're too dumb to multiply by 5, I don't know what to tell you. The rest of your points are system design choices that have nothing to do with dice

d100 is generally not binary. it generally includes critical success/failure.

sure i can. it still carries a different flavor. that said, i'd rather say that d20 is d100 for hipsters aka gygax and co.

>Realistic hardcap of skills - no bullshit monsters with AC of 73
>realistic hit point values - no 600 HP behemoths
Let me tell you about this thing they call Anima - Beyond Fantasy, which also happens to use a d100.

>when HP means meat points
never?

Making the possible success result have unequal chance of occurring is similar to using a bell curve of die results. For example, 2d6 has a 2 to 3% chance of resulting in a roll of 12. Mapping the success table of a d100 to have a 2 or 3% chance to yield the same degree of success.

>Yeah, you can: any successful roll that is divisible by 2 (even number) is better than a normal success. If it is divisible by 5 instead, it's another step better. If it's divisble by 10 it's yet another step better.
I don't think I have seem this before, but I really like the idea of adding effects based on divisors

What do you guys think of the new RQ?

Never played any d% system besides Dark Heresy.

Is it good and fun as all the blog entries make it looks? What is better/worse compared to previous versions?

That's what he said.