# ACKS Dwimmermount - error in Effects of the Great Machine table?

On page 250 the table "EFFECTS OF THE GREAT MACHINE" a roll of 11 states:

"Remove the wards on the Great Machine placed by the paladins. This multiplies the chance of successful sudy by 5 (e.g. a 9th level magic user with INT 16 has a 50% chance)."

In the ACKS version figuring out how to operate the technology of the Great Ancients is  Magical Engineering proficiency throw, not a % chance of success. It looks like this text is an artifact left over from the LL version. How should this result actually be resolved for ACKS? Understanding how to operate the Great Machine has a base -13 penalty to the proficiency throw. Should this be removed by some amount if the paladins' wards are removed?

(Bump)

Huh. Let's assume I didn't do this wrong:

A straight conversion, I guess, it's a variable amount based on your Magic Research Throw + Mods....

LL version: 9th level MU, INT 16+, rod, has a base chance of 10%; effect 11 takes that to 50%.

ACKS: 9th level Mage, INT 16+, rod, has a base chance of (8+, -13 > 21+, +2 INT > 19+) or 10%, same as above. Multiply that by 5 (10% > 50%) gets us a throw of 11+.

If we range that out to the entire spectrum of Magical Research throws, and, in addition, eliminate from consideration how you multiply a 0% chance of success by 5, and take into account the 15% failure rate for a throw of 1-3 for auto-success throws, we get:

 Throw with Mods -13 Penalty Regular Chance x5 Chance x5 Throw x5 Chance w/Failure 8 21 0.00% 0.00% 21 0.00% 7 20 5.00% 25.00% 16 25.00% 6 19 10.00% 50.00% 11 50.00% 5 18 15.00% 75.00% 6 75.00% 4 17 20.00% 100.00% 1 85.00% 3 16 25.00% 125.00% 1 85.00% 2 15 30.00% 150.00% 1 85.00% 1 14 35.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% 0 13 40.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% -1 12 45.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% -2 11 50.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% -3 10 55.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% -4 9 60.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% -5 8 65.00% 160.00% 1 85.00% -6 7 70.00% 160.00% 1 85.00%

So if you have a Magical Research Throw, in this particular situation, of 7+, by either being 10th level, or by some combination of other bonuses, your default chance adds 13 to your roll, for a roll of 20+ - or, 5%. By five that's 25%, which converts back to a throw of 16+.

After you get to a situational throw of 4+, you are only failing on the usual 1-3 of a Magic Research Throw with the multiplier.

In comparison, the LL Magic-User (INT 16+, Level 9+) can have a best chance of 20% if they know the Tongue of the Great Ancients (doubles), 50% with ward dropped, and up to 100% if they have both.

So...wider range of possibilities in ACKS with an overall cap of 15% failure rate.

If instead you take the "50% better chance" as halving the -13 penalty to -7:

 Throw with Mods -13 Penalty Regular Chance -7 Penalty -7 Chance w/Failure 14 27 -45.00% 21 0.00% 13 26 -40.00% 20 5.00% 12 25 -35.00% 19 10.00% 11 24 -30.00% 18 15.00% 10 23 -25.00% 17 20.00% 9 22 -20.00% 16 25.00% 8 21 0.00% 15 30.00% 7 20 5.00% 14 35.00% 6 19 10.00% 13 40.00% 5 18 15.00% 12 45.00% 4 17 20.00% 11 50.00% 3 16 25.00% 10 55.00% 2 15 30.00% 9 60.00% 1 14 35.00% 8 65.00% 0 13 40.00% 7 70.00% -1 12 45.00% 6 75.00% -2 11 50.00% 5 80.00% -3 10 55.00% 4 85.00% -4 9 60.00% 3 85.00% -5 8 65.00% 2 85.00% -6 7 70.00% 1 85.00%

(-6 would shift everything up 5%)

...which increases the overall chance of failure after dropping the wards quite a bit.

I feel like the first option is probably more true to the intent, if the original intent was the LL version, but your mileage may vary.

The first table can be simplified as:

 Modified Magical Research Throw Wards In Place Wards Dropped 8+ or more - no chance- - no chance- 7+ 20+ 16+ 6+ 19+ 11+ 5+ 18+ 6+ 4+ 17+ 1+ 3+ 16+ 1+ 2+ 15+ 1+ 1+ 14+ 1+ 0+ 13+ 1+ -1+ 12+ 1+ -2+ 11+ 1+ -3+ 10+ 1+ -4+ 9+ 1+ -5+ 8+ 1+ -6+ 7+ 1+

Thanks for the analysis. At first glance I think I like the second option more even though it might not be in keeping the same spirit as the LL rules, even though the LL rules allow for a ready path to 100% success. The first approach seems to have to quick a path to the maximum success rate of 85%, which doesn't seem to fir with how ACKS treats the progression of success. I'll need to think further before settling on either option despite my initial preference. Thanks again!