The Forge Archives

Hi all,

Thought I would present the very barebones of my system in hope for a little inspiration from your input. This is very barebones. I do have other rules ideas but there is no need to present them as yet. I'm really dissatisfied with combat, as it is currently resolved with one roll, and seeing that this game has a lot of combat I'm looking for some more rules to add a bit of drama and even tactics-as well as seeking general opinions.

Anyway here it is:

Attributes
All the items on the Character Sheet are known as Attributes. These are your Characters personality traits, skills, passions, desires, beliefs-indeed anything that is important to your character is noted on the Character Sheet. Each Attribute has an associated level, and a dice at that level, defining the depth or proficiency of the Attribute. In system terms, there is no difference between any of the attributes; a characters traits, skills, etc. all function the same and can 'connect' with each other; traits can affect your skills, or the camaraderie you share with your fellow men on the battlefield can increase your chance of victory, for instance. But more on this later. Some entries we might find on a Character Sheet may look like this:
  Horse training   1D6
  Horse Riding  2D12
  Archery  2D20
  Generous 1D8
  Impulsive  1D4
To understand the meaning of those dice next to the attributes let's look at the dice ladder:

The Dice Ladder
There are seven dice, from low (d20) to high (d4), on the dice ladder, these are:
d20   d16   d12   d10   d8   d6   d4
Now this dice ladder lies within another ladder of bigger steps or levels. So if a d20 is the bottom and a d4 is the top, how do we go higher than a d4? We simply use a d20 but at level 2. The level is represented by a number before the dice. Therefore 1d20 means a dice 20 at level 1. 3d8 means a dice 8 at level 3. Although the characters will frequently transcend it, Level 1 is considered the human level. This means the average person will have average (1d10) strength, wisdom, intelligence etc.

Target Rolls
Uncontested rolls are rolled against a TN (Target Number) set by the GM. The default TN is 5 at any level. The PC rolls the dice. If the number is 5 or less then it is a success, a roll of 6 or above is a failure. In uncontested rolls the GM should move the TN up or down instead of modifying the characters dice level.

Contested Rolls
Contestes Rolls are used when two characters are in a contest. Both contestants roll their dice and the difference is noted. In contest rolls the results are always deducted from each other and the margin of success noted for the the person with the lowest (best) roll. When the two opponents are at different levels a margin can still be easily found. Just add 20 to the opponent on the lower level before deducting them. E.g. Player A rolls a 5 on a 1d8 (d8 at level 1), Player B rolls 16 on a 2d20 (d20 at level 2). Player B beats Player A by a margin of 9. In combat, a Players Character may roll a minor victory over his opponent and the opponent leave sulking in one scene, and yet in another, the GM may have the opponent tenaciously fight, making numerous rolls until his demise by a total victory.
- If there is a tie, there is a tie.
- If the difference is 1 to 5 then the victory is fairly negligle.
- If the difference is 6 to 10 it is a minor victor.
- If the difference is 11 to 15 it is a major victory.
- If the difference is 16+ it is a total victory

Total Victory
The Player can decide on the results of a total victory, In combat this may mean he chooses anyhting such as:
Death to the opponent, severe injury, the opponent is knocked unconscious or humiliated, a ransom is asked or the opponent is taken into slavery, ask the opponent for a favour/help etc. etc.

The Critical Success
A roll of a 1 is a critical success and the PC may immediately reroll with a d20 at the next level.

Equipmet
Eqipment; weapons, armour, grappling hooks etc. work differently to attributes and are used to modify them. They represented by bonus die as +1, +2, +3 etc. e.g. A dagger might be +1, a broadsword +3.

Mods
Mods or modifiers are bonuses or penalties that alter your dice ladder, they are added by the PC or GM. In a given situation the PC may modify his main attribute with other relevant attributes to gain an increase in dice. The additional attributes give a bonus in dice equivalent to the level of the attribute.
Example:
Akira is wielding his mace in war. He is using Mace Fighting (1d8) as his main attribute for the situation. His Mace has a damage potential of +3 and because mace fighting also requires strength for effectiveness he adds the level of his Strength (1d8), which is 1. Now Akira rolls a 2d16 (1d8 +3, +1) for his attack.
The GM may grant bonus dice or penalty dice (usually no more or less than 5) according to the situation. For example shooting a moving target may give a 1 dice penalty, fighting from higher ground may give a +1 bonus etc.


So that's the basic kernel of the system.

* Critiques?
* Suggestions for tactical/dramatic/interesting combat?

Thanks,
Akuma Kyo.

Quote from: Akuma KyoI'm really dissatisfied with combat, as it is currently resolved with one roll, and seeing that this game has a lot of combat I'm looking for some more rules to add a bit of drama and even tactics-as well as seeking general opinions.
...
* Suggestions for tactical/dramatic/interesting combat?

I've noticed that your game seems to involve a lot of combat so far. Is combat what the game is about? Is there any other interesting part?

Have you checked out D&D3E or Riddle of Steel (for challenging combat systems), or IronClaw and the Window (for step dice systems) yet? In what ways, would your ideal system surpass or exceed these systems?

Hi Andrew,

Yes, there is a lot more to the game than combat but my post is specifically addressing this part of the game. It is too much to go into my entire sketchbook here and at the moment it is only really combat- or multiple contents, to be more precise-that is bugging me. I understand what you are asking and realize here at the forge you like people to delve deeper than just combat stuff but in this post I really am just wondering about this aspect.

QuoteHave you checked out D&D3E or Riddle of Steel (for challenging combat systems), or IronClaw and the Window (for step dice systems) yet?

D&D3E - Haven't played this since AD&D, oohh a long time ago. Does my feudal japan game really need so many extraneous rules (e.g. races: elves, dwarves, gnomes etc.)? Or is it the D20 system you mean? Don't know much about it all, is it really worth looking at? oh yeah, and I like the idea of wargaming but the stuff I want to do is like with thousands, millions of units, think of the CRPG: Shogun: Total War. - I don't think this sort of stuff is accomplishable with D&D is it?

TROS - I have the quickstart rules. Can't live with the magic section. I've never actually played it so I may be being unfair here - but combat looks terribly complex and slow. Do I really need to be so realistic (my game is more cinematic samurai/ninja stuff)

IronClaw - Don't know anything about this game. I will look it up.

The Window - Yep, a big inspiration in fact. However, The Window is really skill and trait based, with very little player power. it touts itself as a 'new wave' rpg but it really is quite old style these days. My game has a lot more funkier stuff going on, all attributes being synonomous for instance - I just haven't mentioned all that jazz because my post is about the basic dice mechanics.

Besides, I think I am too attached to my system, something really amazing would have to come along for me to abandon it now and go for that. I'm just showing you a part- the very bare bones of the dice mechanics- of the system. At the moment I am just pondering multiple contest rolls and after suggestions.

Quote from: Akuma KyoBesides, I think I am too attached to my system,..

This should be an alarm bell to you. It means that you are deliberately blinding yourself to other possibilities. It's far better to focus and become attached to your goal, what you want to achieve, rather than becoming attached to the means to accomplish something.

Hi, Akuma Kyo. (Sorry, I can't tell which is your personal name.)
I'll just try to reveal what your goals seem to be in your post above:

Quote from: Akuma Kyo...it is only really combat- or multiple contents, to be more precise-that is bugging me.

...I like the idea of wargaming but the stuff I want to do is like with thousands, millions of units, think of the CRPG: Shogun: Total War.

TROS - ... Can't live with the magic section. ...combat looks terribly complex and slow. Do I really need to be so realistic (my game is more cinematic samurai/ninja stuff).

I get the feeling that there will be samurai and ninja, lots of showy martial arts with samurai swords whirling and flying shuriken from the ninja. There's really big battles as well, where the fates of rulers are decided on the battlefield. And there's no Western magic, but there might be some low level Eastern magic? Something that fits a fantasy Nippon? Players roleplay samurai in service or daimyo?

Is that about right? Or is there more?

Could you outline a typical playsession, without any reference to a game system?

QuoteI get the feeling that there will be samurai and ninja, lots of showy martial arts with samurai swords whirling and flying shuriken from the ninja. There's really big battles as well, where the fates of rulers are decided on the battlefield. And there's no Western magic, but there might be some low level Eastern magic? Something that fits a fantasy Nippon? Players roleplay samurai in service or daimyo?

Is that about right? Or is there more?

Nice. I am imagining somewhere in between Monkey Magic and Dynasty! (Remember those old TV shows?) There will be strong Buddhist/Taoist themes, political dramas-twists and subplots, and yes some "really big battles" for regions.

But I guess I am brushing broad strokes and counting on different play sessions having different moods/themes. When you are in the mood you could embark on a thriller, ninja assissination, mystery type genre - and yet in another a very serious exploration into aggressive empire-building. I am entertaining the idea of a mass combat meta game - moving completely away from the NAR at times and playing a tactical war game with perhaps a completely different set of rules. But that is not yet evolved enough.

I like the simplicity of my design as it stands but I fear it may be too simple in resolving complex challenges between characters and would like to stretch it out a little here. You and everyone else around here will probably curse me for saying this but perhaps it is better if you don't think of the setting, and take a "uiniversal" approach to this design.

Seeing them as dice mechanics for resolving potentially long conflicts-regardless of the setting/genre/modern day/ancient times- is the way I am looking at it.

P.S.

It's Akuma.

Hi, Akuma!

First, I love your setting idea - seems like it offers a lot of potential for conflict (both social & physical).  It helps, too, that I've always liked Asian-themed settings. :)

If you're still looking for some system or setting information, you might check out WotC's Oriental Adventures ruleset for d20.  Even if you can't stand the d20 system, you could probably glean a few ideas from it... I remeber the martial arts stuff in particular having some neat ideas.  I think there was a Sorcerer supplement that included rules for martial arts, too, though I don't remember which one.

I've got a couple of questions about your rules, though.

For target rolls, the default TN is 5.  How does this work when you have a level greater then one?  Do you add an automatic 20 to the TN?

Could you tell us a little more about character creation?  What does it cost to move up the dice ladder, etc?

Cheers,
-joshua

Hi all,

QuoteThis should be an alarm bell to you.

Sorry, I somehow missed this post Andrew. I won't rule out you being right. I am very open to adopting another system, but honestly, what are the chances that one will fit your bill?

Hey Josh, thanks for the interest and the tip, I will definately look into Oriental Adventures. As far as Target numbers go you can just set the default at 5 at various levels I write this as 1t5 (target number of 5 at level 1), 3t5 (target number of 5 at level 3) etc. of course you can make the target 1t7, 2t16, 3t8, whatever....I havn't really delved too deep as yet into the Chargen, points etc. but I am thinking of basing the advancement on characters following the "right path' in a buddhist way. In chargen the character may represented 1 of the 12 animals in the horoscope and have an exaggerated virtue and vice of that animal (very monkey magic like) to explore.  However I'd rather not expose too much about that as yet as it is still all unclear to me and at the moment I am focusing on the basic dice mechanics.

I have some ideas for combat, just throwing it around:

Combat Rolls
There are two rolls to determine combat. The first to establish initiative, the second for attack and defense.

Step 1. Both characters roll one dice for initiative.
INITIATIVE = Weapon Mastery (Main Attribute) + Any Appropriate Mods (agility, speed etc...) - Deduct Armour/weapon strength/weight ???

Step2. The better initiative roll now rolls attack, the loser rolls defense dice.
ATTACK = Weapon Mastery (Main Attribute) + Any Appropriate Mods (strength, eagle eye, etc...)
DEFENSE = Weapon Mastery (Main Attribute) + Any Appropriate Mods (armour, shield, dodge etc..)
All rolls Moded with other appropriate attributes like; love of fair maiden, anger, hatred of huns etc. of course.

It should still be pretty fast with only two rolls.

Other stuff to potentially ad are tactical things like;

Weapon stats
A sword can thrust (+0 Initiative, +1 Attack)
A sword can swing (-1 Initiative, +2 Attack)

Other stuff like;
Defensive stance - Character can adopt a defensive stance adding +2 to his defense but does not attack, waiting for rienforcements perhaps.
Aggressive attack - Character can launch a haymaker adding +2 to initiative and attack (if successful) but risk losing the initiative and suffering -2 (or more?) when defending.

Y'know that kinda stuff..

I'm also thinking of other things which aren't key issues as yet: like points in the kitty being able to be burnt to temporarily boost attributes (combat or otherwise). But funky stuff can be focused on later.

I think what I really need to work out is what the margins do. For instance does a minor victory over the opponent in a contest with multiple rolls affect his abilities, applying penalty mods for a round or more?

Anyway, any suggestions?


Akuma.

Sorry, couldn't edit last post but I forgot to add equipment mods, should look like this:

Combat Rolls
There are two rolls to determine combat. The first to establish initiative, the second for attack and defense.

Step 1. Both characters roll one dice for initiative.
INITIATIVE = Weapon Mastery (Main Attribute) + Any Appropriate Mods (agility, speed etc...) - Deduct Armour/weapon strength/weight ???

Step2. The better initiative roll now rolls attack, the loser rolls defense dice.
ATTACK = Weapon Mastery (Main Attribute) + Any Appropriate Mods (strength, eagle eye, etc...) + weapon
DEFENSE = Weapon Mastery (Main Attribute) + Any Appropriate Mods (armour, shield, dodge etc..) - deduct weapon strength/weight???
All rolls Moded with other appropriate attributes like; love of fair maiden, anger, hatred of huns etc. of course.

Akuma,

I think you need to take a good hard look at how the system works.  For instance, 1d6 vs 1d6 can't get more than an "incidental victory".  Is how you want things to run?  It might be,  but it does seem a little counter-intuitive.

Why is 1 a critical success?  If high is good,  don't you mean "max result" or something like than?

Be advised with the critical rules as they are I'll take a 1d4 against 1d6, 1d8, maybe 1d10.  1d4 has a 25% chance each roll of getting a critical, and then next round I get the big 1d20 and get a good chance of putting my opponent away.  A little counter-intuitive.

Dear eef,

I think you have got it wrong.

QuoteWhy is 1 a critical success? If high is good, don't you mean "max result" or something like than?

On the contrary low is good. The person with the lower roll wins. Thus a 1 is the best roll you can make.

QuoteFor instance, 1d6 vs 1d6 can't get more than an "incidental victory".

hence this, taken directly from my notes:

QUICK ROLLS
When two characters are a similar level e.g. They are both contesting with 1d8 and they are both engaged in a contest of multiple rolls, it is not nessecary to tediously narrate each roll as there could be a long succession of negligible margins. In this case each character Quick Rolls until a critical success is achieved. The GM can simply make sweeping statements to gloss over the quick rolls and then narrate the significant event.

I think this is actually a strong point, people of equal strength do battle for a very long time until some final advantage point is gained making one suddenly the vicor (think of the final duels between the protagonists and antagonists at the end of any movie you can think of).

Good points but if you see that the ladder is actually the reverse of what you currently think it is it will be clearer. Actually the dice are stepping down on levels that are stepping up.

Lower roll is better (within a level), roll a 1 and you can immediatley roll again at the next level up. When I say "level" I mean another whole set of 7 dice.

DIAGRAM:

LEVEL 1-------------------------|-LEVEL 2-------------------- etc..
d20 d16 d12 d10 d8 d6 d4 | d20 d16 d12 d10 d8 d6 d4 etc..
Amateur -------------Perfect | Amateur------------------Perfect

Does this help?

Just thought I would step back a bit here and reply to one of Andrews posts, only because a question he asked has stuck in my head and really made me think .

QuoteHave you checked out D&D3E or Riddle of Steel (for challenging combat systems), or IronClaw and the Window (for step dice systems) yet? In what ways, would your ideal system surpass or exceed these systems?

Well, what I like about this system is that it is Universal. Many games claim to be "universal"; D20, GURPS, The Basic Role Playing System, but NONE of these are truly universal systems because they rely on predifined attributes/stats (strength, charisma, intelligence etc.). In a game where strength isn't important these system becomes fairly useless. My system says "Hey, pick whatever attributes are important to your game and modify them with other important attributes". I like that.


It's also simple. All contests are resolved with the same mechanic. Step die-how simple can you get? simple math as well-deducting two numbers from each other. All attributes are significant, therefore your skill in combat can be effected by your mood, beliefs, desires, relationships etc. We find in Roman literature on warfare that generals should smile before entering battle to boost their soldiers morale. I don't think D&D takes this into consideration. A scene involving David slaying Goliath could easily be
accomplished with this system.

I like the fact that amateurs can fluke good scores but those well trained narrow there chances of failure - this is quite realistic.

I like that it can scale indefinately-Superheroes would work a treat.

I like that there are no Hit Points, health etc..- just victories with different meanings according to the situation and player/character.

There's something about rolling a "1" that gels well with perfection.

Anyway, enough ranting, just thought I'd divulge why I have a little attachment to the system.

Quote from: Akuma KyoHi all,

QuoteThis should be an alarm bell to you.

Sorry, I somehow missed this post Andrew. I won't rule out you being right. I am very open to adopting another system, but honestly, what are the chances that one will fit your bill?

Extremely high, if one focuses on the goal rather than the means to get somewhere. By always knowing what kind of game play you want, you can then design, make, test, refine, rebuild, replace game systems until it matches your desired end point.

How do I know this? Just from personal experience and knowing the 7 habits. Have a quick look at this page: http://www.quickmba.com/mgmt/7hab/ and habit number 2: "Begin with the End in Mind". Knowing what your system will achieve, allows you to create the system that will achieve it. Otherwise, you're merely hacking paths in a jungle of possibilities, with no one looking to make sure you're headed in the right direction to your goal.

Quote from: Akuma KyoThere's something about rolling a "1" that gels well with perfection.

I agree. I quite like it as well. It's one of things I intend doing some time to my own step-die combat system based on Easter and Cinematic martial arts.

Step 0.
Assuming the goal is: a Eastern & Cinematic Martial Arts combat system suitable for having battles between expert samurai, ninjas, and so on, in Medieval Japan, as described in comic book, manga, anime, and movies, and it should have options for a short contest and a long contest, with the long contest being "more interesting".

Steps 1+
I would remove the large steps in the quality rating table and remove the uncontested target number of 5, replacing it with the GM rolling an appropriate number of D4 - D20, so all rolls are contested. The lowest die roll win the contest. The number on each die is the number of faults that each character made in the flurry of blows. The character whose player rolled the lowest, had found the flaw in it's opponent's defences, gets their blow through and so wins the duel/contest. The difference in the two totals is the number of facts the winning player can narrate. The player that lost the contest/duel gets to narrate the effects the winning player has on the loosing character, if any.

There's several ways of making a contest "more interesting". What makes it more interesting to you, Akuma? Would it be more rolls? The interaction between weapons and armour? Stategy and tactics, like flanking or getting behind your opponent? What about the samurai semi-mystical perception abilities? What about video game options, like throwing fireballs from the hands, dancing on bamboo stalks, or flying?

QuoteThere's several ways of making a contest "more interesting". What makes it more interesting to you, Akuma? Would it be more rolls? The interaction between weapons and armour? Stategy and tactics, like flanking or getting behind your opponent? What about the samurai semi-mystical perception abilities? What about video game options, like throwing fireballs from the hands, dancing on bamboo stalks, or flying?

I most definitely imagined flying, fireballs and tactical maneuvers! Indeed all of the above. And i do have some ideas for these already (flying being in the realm of magic but usuable in combat). "more rolls?" I don't want the rolls to be more complicated as such, just to give a sense of fairness (by players being able to roll more than once), add drama, and perhaps offer an opportunity for tactics-replicating the fictional contests we see in-as you say- "comic book, manga, anime, and movies".

Step 0

Yep.

Step 1+

Quoteremove the large steps in the quality rating table

Good idea, something I did consider but will most certainly review again.

Quoteand remove the uncontested target number of 5, replacing it with the GM rolling an appropriate number of D4 - D20, so all rolls are contested.

I did think of this too but thought it easier and more appropriate to use a target number for "static" things. For example the hieght of a wall doesn't change so a target number would be more appropriate than a roll if the character wanted to jump it. But again, it is something to reconsider.

QuoteThe difference in the two totals is the number of facts the winning player can narrate.

I like your thinking but I didn't really see the victory as a powertool for the player to have dramatic narrative control, altering the plot-as such. This is not a moment like "the monologue of victory" in the pool. I have another technique for that, that is a lot more subtle but certainly gives players some power in story development. No, I see the victory as more like just a decision that someone would make in this period by the player; kill, injure badly but let live, put into slavery, ask for a ransom etc... Sure the outcome is completely in the hands of the player but it's not a licence to describe what's happening in the next room.

And what if one character rolls a critical and the difference ends up being 35! That's a lot of facts to narrate.

Struggling with the margins of victory as I am, I will, as you suggested, think about alternatives to the chunky steps. is still doesn't solve my dilemna of multiple rolls though.

The 7 habits of highly effective people is a good read, I've saved the page to read again.

P.S.
Andrew, I noticed on your site some wargaming systems that I am fascinated with; S and simply skirmish, I find the different actions in Duel very interesting. I haven't had a good read as yet but am about to do so.
Just off hand, have you ever come across anything that dealt with armies of thousands?

Quote from: Akuma Kyo
Lower roll is better (within a level), roll a 1 and you can immediatley roll again at the next level up. When I say "level" I mean another whole set of 7 dice.

DIAGRAM:

LEVEL 1-------------------------|-LEVEL 2-------------------- etc..
d20 d16 d12 d10 d8 d6 d4 | d20 d16 d12 d10 d8 d6 d4 etc..
Amateur -------------Perfect | Amateur------------------Perfect

Does this help?

I'm sorry but I'm being really dense here.  
Let's say I have 1d4 against 2d10.  I roll
1d4     3
2d10   6, 7

who wins?

Quote from: eef

Quote from: Akuma Kyo
Lower roll is better (within a level), roll a 1 and you can immediatley roll again at the next level up. When I say "level" I mean another whole set of 7 dice.

DIAGRAM:

LEVEL 1-------------------------|-LEVEL 2-------------------- etc..
d20 d16 d12 d10 d8 d6 d4 | d20 d16 d12 d10 d8 d6 d4 etc..
Amateur -------------Perfect | Amateur------------------Perfect

Does this help?

I'm sorry but I'm being really dense here.  
Let's say I have 1d4 against 2d10.  I roll
1d4     3
2d10   6, 7

who wins?

Actually for the second level D10, there's only roll of the D10. The lower level player adds 20 to their score. So the players roll:
Level 1, D4 rolls: 3, but adds 20 for being one level less, which gives: 23
Level 2, D10 resulting in 6.
The difference is 23 - 6 = 17, and the winner is the second player, whose total is lower.

Quote from: Akuma KyoAnd what if one character rolls a critical and the difference ends up being 35! That's a lot of facts to narrate.

I'd also remove criticals and fumbles as well. They're just deprotagonising to players who suffer the effects of an NPC's critical or who roll a fumble themselves.

To reduce the size of the differences, I'd have each level difference being a second chance, instead. So a player with level 4 at D10, versus a second player with level 3 at D12, would roll two D10, and choose the best result, while the second player just rolls one D12.

Or let each player roll one die each, and the highest level allows that player to reroll either their own die or their opponent's die a number of times equal to the difference. So with the first player at Level 4 with D10 and the second player at level 1 with D6, both players roll 1 die each (D10 for player 1; D6 for player 2). The first player has 4 - 1 = 3 reroll oportunities. For example, player 1 rolls D10, gets: 9 and player 2 rolls D6 and gets 1. Player 1 spends a reroll opportunity and player 2 has to reroll and gets, say, 4. Player 1 then spends another reroll and rerolls their own D10 and gets, say, 3.

Quote from: Akuma KyoJust off hand, have you ever come across anything that dealt with armies of thousands?

War game systems and war game campaign systems. I've got a few on my hard disk; some are good, some are bad, some aren't available on the internet any more; and some deal with Eastern or Japanese medieval settings. I've found that most conventional RPG systems dealing with large battles are very easily broken by gamist players.

eef,

Andrew is righ. I know that 2d10 traditionally means 2 x d10 (roll two d10's or a d10 twice) but in this system the number before the die represents the level and has nothing to do with the number of rolls. Confusing, I know, sorry-I did think of writing it other ways; d10 (2), 2-d10 etc. but it just didn't look as neat as 2d10.

QuoteI'd also remove criticals and fumbles as well. They're just deprotagonising to players who suffer the effects of an NPC's critical or who roll a fumble themselves.

I like the critical success (hate fumbles, always have) because as eef pointed out-when two players are of equal ability e.g. both are d6's then the margins are always negligible. I liked this, however, coupled with the critical success-very cinematic effect-opponents of equal skill with blood soaked bandages, cuts, bruises, scratches and sweat, but none the less fighting at there max capacity (usually the climatic scene near the end of the film), dueling away for ages, then suddenly a breakthrough-the protagonist manages to make the final blow and suddenly it's all over.

But I see that you are going a different direction with it and yes it could just as easily be the antagonist with the critical.

QuoteTo reduce the size of the differences, I'd have each level difference being a second chance, instead. So a player with level 4 at D10, versus a second player with level 3 at D12, would roll two D10, and choose the best result, while the second player just rolls one D12.

Or let each player roll one die each, and the highest level allows that player to reroll either their own die or their opponent's die a number of times equal to the difference. So with the first player at Level 4 with D10 and the second player at level 1 with D6, both players roll 1 die each (D10 for player 1; D6 for player 2). The first player has 4 - 1 = 3 reroll oportunities. For example, player 1 rolls D10, gets: 9 and player 2 rolls D6 and gets 1. Player 1 spends a reroll opportunity and player 2 has to reroll and gets, say, 4. Player 1 then spends another reroll and rerolls their own D10 and gets, say, 3.

This doesn't quite work. You spend all your hard earned points upgrading from a d20 to a d4 to then go to 2 x d20's? I would rather stick with a d4 then roll a d20 twice. The odds are much better with the d4 aren't they?

Your idea can still be done though. Some people use this in the Window to advance while still remaining in the step ladder. You go from d30 to d4, after d4 you get +1 that is d4+1, then d4+2, d4+3 etc..
So Opponent A is d4+2, Opponent B is d12, Opponent B is reduced 2 steps (d16 -> d20) so now rolls with a d20. In another example Opponent A has d4+5, Opponent B has d4+2, the difference in the 'bonus die' is 3, so Opponent B (because he is lower) has his d4 reduced 3 rungs down the ladder to d10 (d6 -> d8 -> d10). Now Opponent A rolls a d4 vs Opponent B's d10.

I could do this OR something I was considering today, on your suggestion,  dropping the margins and going with this; reduce the total victory to 10, 10 or more is a complete victory anything less is negligible. Now if the player has a minor victory over the NPC e.g. a difference of 8 the GM could have the NPC consider the "fight or flight" response. And consequently the PC's could do this too-especially if the the NPC's dice are hidden-a margin like this might scare the PC's into a retreat. Whatever, the point is there are only two outcomes-complete victory or not.

QuoteI've found that most conventional RPG systems dealing with large battles are very easily broken by gamist players.

Poo. I was hoping that someone had written a chess-like wargame, a game with total replay value that can't be broken-just like chess.

Andrew, the link to rebol in your posts doesn't work - internal server error. Also a lot of the game links at your site give a 'file not found' error.

Quote from: Akuma KyoAndrew, the link to rebol in your posts doesn't work - internal server error.

Looks like the server may have failed.

Quote from: Akuma KyoAlso a lot of the game links at your site give a 'file not found' error.

I must fix up my website generation software sometime.

Quote from: Akuma Kyo

QuoteI've found that most conventional RPG systems dealing with large battles are very easily broken by gamist players.

Poo. I was hoping that someone had written a chess-like wargame, a game with total replay value that can't be broken-just like chess.

It's still in my head. My current skirmish wargame has no ranges, no measuring (except in a very subtle way), no turns, no points, and is based on events rather than simulation. I must write it down.

Thanks a lot, Andrew.  My apologies for being so dense.

The dice system is making sense now, and it is rather interesting.  However, be advised that the dice (if I have it right!) are going to give lots of weird results.

For instance, take 1d4 against 2d20.  1d4 has a range of 1d4+20 = 21-24, with an average of 22.5 2d20 has a range of 2-40 with an average of 21.  The range of results (ignoring criticals) is 2 - 24 = +22 for 2d20 to 40 - 21 = + 19 for the 1d4.  Since the 1d4 criticals 25% of the time and 2d20 criticals about 10% of the time, I'd actually give a slight edge to the 1d4 over the 2d20.  

On the other hand, I'd expect 2d12 (range 2-24) to crunch the 1d4 pretty easily.  So 1d4 is equal to 2d20 but is much worse that 2d12.

That may be a bug, that may be a feature.  Up to you.

eef,

I'm not sure if your getting it. The easiest way to understand it is to forget about the levels for a moment. Let's pretend there are no levels, all we have are 7 dice from bad (d20) to good (d4). These are; d20, d16, d12, d10, d8, d6, d4.

Now the PC's and NPC's roll the dice in a contest, the lowest roll wins.
e.g. Akira has sword mastery of d16 vs a monster who has a fierce attack of d8. They both roll, Akira gets a 10, the monster gets a 2. The monster wins by a margin of 8.

O.K. Now let's say they are both at level 1. The dice remain the same. Akira rolls a d16 and the monster a d8.

Now let's say the monster is heaps stronger at level 2. The dice remain the same Akira rolls a d16 and the moster rolls a d8. The only difference this time is that Akira gets 20 added to his roll. So the results in this contest if the results are the same as ther previous example-Akira rolls a 10 (Now add 20 to this for being on a lower level) so he gets 30. The monster, as before, gets a 2. Now the difference is 28.

Does that make better sense?

Andrew, expect an email from me soon about S, Simple Skirmish etc...

For now I will go back to the lab and experiment with the ideas in this thread a bit further.

Thanks everyone for their input.

Best,
Akuma.

Actually when it comes to actual play my mind subtracts the higher levels' roll from 20 then adds it to the lower levels rolls.

It's sounds complex but in reality it's very simple - looking at the dice your mind can just work it out in a second very naturally.

For instance imagine Character A level 1 gets a 5 against Character B at level 2 with a 10. The difference is 15.

FUNKY TABLE:

.....Level 1 ----------------| Level 2 ---------------------------------
<--10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 | 20 19 18 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7-->
.....................^ Character A rolls 5 ............................. ^ Character B rolls 10
..................... | <----------- the difference is 15 --------> |


O.K. just try rolling the dice and you'll see what I mean. :-)

Yes I understand now.  My apologies for being spectacularly dense in this thread.  Thanks a lot for your patience.