Dice-less Systems: feedback on and experiences with

[Garbados]

I'm creating a setting-independent highly-extensible dice-less system called Ex Deus, and was looking for feedback or play experience with systems that didn't use dice. So guys, what're they like? What were your good experiences with them? And the bad?

Ex Deus pursues fast and simple tactics-oriented game play, with rules that value realism in order to be intuitive (anywhere realism hampers simplicity more than it offers intuitive play, simplicity wins). I chose to make the game not use dice when my little brother looked over an early draft of the game and remarked, "How is it different from other systems?" So I took out the dice.

I've found the dice-less aspect to be a great mechanic for three reasons: 1.) It speeds up gameplay because you're never slowed down by counting dice, and 2.) Static values are much more receptive to operations like multiplication. 3.) Without the chaos of the dice, the consequences of an action rest solely on the player's shoulders. But of course I haven't started real playtesting, only run brief scenarios in my head or on paper. So here I am, looking for advice.

So, what's your experience with dice-less systems?

[M. Burrell]

Beautifully vague. Have you considered a career in politics?

I'm very interested in diceless play - could you give a more in-depth explanation of the system itself?

Cheers,
Mike.

[Jasper Flick]

What do you mean with "dice-less"?

I guess you mean a game without some kind of impartial random generator in resolution, that is, the absense of Fortune. That leaves Drama and Karma for resolution. As you're talking about static values, you're probably aiming for Karma-based resolution. But who knows?

A search for Drama, Fortune, Karma, or DFK should give you lots of research material. But I'm not sure what's the best place to start...

[Garbados]

@ M. Burrell: Certainly! I was afraid of bogging people down with text, but you asked for it, so here we go.

Ex Deus' guiding mechanic reads "Attribute + Attribute + Skill". If that number is higher than the challenge (DC, TN, etc.), it succeeds. So, to attempt anything, you pick the appropriate skill and two attributes (of the game's eight). What skill is used will typically be dictated by the situation, but the attributes chosen influence the outcome more colorfully than with simple success or failure: a lock-picking attempt, depending on its attributes, could silently pass the lock's tumblers, break the lock, or even remove it from the door. This two-attribute style comes in especially handy in combat tactics, when which attributes you choose determine how much energy you spend attacking others, moving, analyzing a situation, aiming, etc. over defending yourself.

There are no classes, no levels, not even a notion of floating experience. Instead, attributes and skills increase as you use them. Even traits can only be earned through in-game experiences. The only way to become a better lock-picker is by picking locks. The only way to become ambidextrous is by accustoming your offhand to main-hand use. Additionally, the game's sixty skills are divided into eight six-skill rings and four three-skill rings. These rings provide skill synergies: each skill in the ring has two neighbors, to which it contributes half of its value as a bonus. And, appropriately enough, these rings are circular: proceed far enough down the ring and you'll end up where you began.

Probably most notable about Ex Deus besides its dice-less aspect is its combat, for three reasons: 1.) A tick system to simulate the real flow of time (e.g. so daggers act faster and more often than halberds) and 2.) Attacks are declared in one tick, and then land some time after that depending on the attacker's effective equipment speed and weapon type, allowing defenders to literally move out of the attack's way. 3.) Completely freeform equipment allows players to build their own weapons, armor, shields, potions, etc. A system of equations called the Balance Formulas derive all the equipment's major stats from its weight (minimum strength required to wield), type (sword, axe, polearm, bow, etc.), and quality (further specialization involving features (benefits) and penalties (flaws that buy feaures without increasing monetary cost)).

My early experience running scenarios and playtesting on paper and in my head have shown the system to have achieved its guiding principles superbly: by removing dice from the system, all responsibility for success falls to the player's choices. And, as suspected, the lack of dice make check resolution very, very fast, and allows players to more easily weigh their options because those options are composed of specific numbers, not number ranges. A peasant with a dagger will beat an armored knight in combat not because the boy rolled high, but because he played smart.

Does that help? I can give examples of play, but I feel like this reply is plenty long already.

@Jasper Flick: Ah, wonderful. I'll get right on researching those, as it sounds like a very promising family of topics.

[Tyler.Tinsley]

A whole lot of my early board games used "zero chaos" systems and mechanics. it sounds like your on the right track to making it work.

The system needs enough layers that the outcome of a players choice is hard to see before it happens. This keeps things exciting however you still have a deterministic system.

Mancala is a wonderful example of this phenomenon. it's also what you should shoot for in terms of complexity.

The amount of math your proposing sounds like it is both a little too much and not quite enough. It's a little too much for most players to do in their head and it's not quite enough to make outcomes obscured to the point of being exciting. I'm not sure if it's actually a problem but I'm sure there is a good solution.

One thing you may want to watch out for are non-winnable situations and with such a system player knowledge is something you really need to control tightly (why would I ever try to pick a look I knew I could not open?)

I know there are a few other dice-less RPGs out there, haven't tried any yet.

[Garbados]

@Jasper Flick: Looked up DFK, also read the GNS essay in the process, and have added to my lexicon an armada of useful terms for examining RPG design. Thank you. And yeah, you were right, when I said dice-less I meant karma-based, but I was also unaware of drama-based systems. My eyes have been widened by the potential of drama mechanics.

@Tyler.Tinsley: My design concept for Ex Deus was to combine elements of Diplomacy with role-playing, in that I wanted players to always know what they were capable of achieving (and achieve it reliably), while having to balance that knowledge against the unknown capabilities and dispositions of those they encountered. The system's unknowns appear most in combat, both physical and social, while actions like picking locks or crafting items are more predictable, because if there's one thing I hate, it's being the party's specialist only to have my skills fail at a critical moment. I don't know about you, but that's an invalidating sensation. I thought I'd leave it out of Ex Deus.

But you're right about the math. The game is simple /to me/, but I wrote it. GMing it is another story, and I can't even begin to fathom that yet without playtesting. Looking over the character sheet, there isn't a lot to keep track of, just lots to think about, not unlike Poker or Diplomacy. Mancala is /wonderfully/ simple, but slow to play and I have no idea how I would adapt such a thing into an RPG. Ex Deus' systems are supposed to provide tactics and strategy in rapid, realistic, simple, and intuitive forms, and I haven't the first clue about how to do that another way.

But you did give me an idea for a system that used cards instead of dice.

[Tyler.Tinsley]

@Tyler.Tinsley:

But you're right about the math. The game is simple /to me/, but I wrote it. GMing it is another story, and I can't even begin to fathom that yet without playtesting. Looking over the character sheet, there isn't a lot to keep track of, just lots to think about, not unlike Poker or Diplomacy. Mancala is /wonderfully/ simple, but slow to play and I have no idea how I would adapt such a thing into an RPG. Ex Deus' systems are supposed to provide tactics and strategy in rapid, realistic, simple, and intuitive forms, and I haven't the first clue about how to do that another way.

But you did give me an idea for a system that used cards instead of dice.

It's not that the math would be too difficult on a case by case basis, it's been my experience with games that rely heavily on math alone tire players out fairly quickly, I had a few small strategy games designs that used change making style math, a few 10 min games of those and my players were ready for a nap, i cant imagine a few hours of roleplaying with a math based game.

I can see where your coming from with the diplomacy/poker angle, this is predetermined information that is hidden to certain parties, a great method to keep things "dice-less" and still exciting. in your system what would be the hidden information?

Decks of cards are an interesting method to resolve actions, check out Prime Time Adventures and Cannibal Contagion for some examples.

[Garbados]

In your system what would be the hidden information?

Out-of-combat, there wouldn't be much. In the lock-picking example, the hidden information is the lock's difficulty, which can be divined to some degree through an Intelligence+Lockpicking check. Knowing the lock's difficulty also enhances your attempts to unlock it, but such things take time. So in that way, given a few minutes' time, you can open any lock within your range. The difficulty comes when you haven't divined the lock's difficulty and need to unlock it quickly. Then it becomes an intriguing unknown.

Physical combat most closely resembles Diplomacy in that you are well aware of what everyone is doing at any point, but what the "right move" is varies wildly by the number and nature of the participants, as well as the environment, and of course your character's own abilities and disposition. No random numbers deepens the tactical weight of each decision. Ex Deus uses a tick system to more closely model real-time combat, and otherwise features mechanics reflective of realistic warfare: feints are critical to combat, heavy equipment slows both movement and attack speeds, and analyzing an enemy enhances actions against him. This way, despite lacking any explicit fortune mechanics, lesser-armed and even lesser-skilled fighters can still overtake superior opponents, but they will do so through intelligent play, not numbers.

Social combat is still in development, but plays similar to a very boiled-down chess, in that you're able to force your opponent to argue in ways he isn't skilled in if he wants to have any chance of success. But, like I said, still in development.

As for the math, I'm streamlining it now. Looks now like the game will use (Attribute + Skill + Misc.) * Equipment as its event resolution system, and I'm simplifying combat as best I can. I don't know how heavy or tiresome that math would be, but that's about as hard as it'd get.

Thanks again for your feedback!