*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 22, 2014, 06:57:07 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4283 Members Latest Member: - otto Most online today: 48 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: [1] 2
Print
Author Topic: A more evolved dice mechanic  (Read 2148 times)
Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« on: January 22, 2010, 07:58:24 AM »

The method I propose not only strikes a balance between fortune and skill - skilled exponents have less variable results than unskilled exponents - but it keeps the arithmetic to a minimum and it automatically scales in relation to your opposition  The concept is called the dice ranking system: there are 10 dice ranks, in which the middle rank is the standard.  The more skilled or able you are in relation to the opposition, the lower the dice rank you roll, and the SMALLER the dice you use.

"Why smaller?"
Because smaller dice have more reliable results, which emulates competency; the more competent you are, the more consistent your results are.  Therefore, the point of rolling dice in the dice ranking system is not to roll high, but to roll low.  However, skill and ability are relative, so if two equally strong muscle-men were arm wrestling, they would roll the standard dice rank rather than a low one. 

"What about modifiers?"
Modifiers don't affect your rolling results directly, but alter the dice rank you roll.  So, let's say your skill with a bow is 5 and the target has a difficulty of 5, then you roll the standard dice rank, but a penalizing modifier, such as darkness, might reduce your skill to 4, which means you roll along a higher dice rank.

The following post shows the mechanics for the dice ranking system.
Logged
Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2010, 08:13:01 AM »

Logged
Warrior Monk
Member

Posts: 85


« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2010, 11:36:51 AM »

On a quick calculation math looks good to me if you use 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10 and after that I'd jump to the 1d20 if the logic of the system is the less experienced your character is compared to the challenge, the more his success is luck-dependant. This is because with 2 dice inevitably you get a "bell curve" on your dice results, meaning it will be harder to obtain the lowest and the hightst results. Yet I think this comes as a nice way to balance success and failure rate for less experienced characters, but I doubt that should be considered on the system. I'd prefer to have less levels and rule that above those levels you automatically fail, and under those limits you automatically win.

And please, I understand what you mean by it and I do respect your accomplishment here but again please don't call it "a more evolved dice mechanic", it kinda gives it bad publicity vibes somehow. Cheers

-Pol
Logged
Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2010, 08:19:21 PM »

The bell curve is intentional; I wanted to represent the capacity to score a long shot.  To make a comparison, a long shot for a d20 is 1 in 20.  With the 8 dice rank, getting the minimum result is 1 in 144.  With the 9 dice rank, getting the minimum is 1 in 512.

The system is neutral, as I have not tailored it for any specific rpg, and the dice rank hierarchy is modular.   Therefore, I could easily just remove one or more of the higher dice ranks in order to suit the purposes of a system.  I would typically suggest the higher dice ranks for systems that desire a higher level of complexity and granularity, such as a simulationist system. 

As for the language in my title, it's simply meant to entice the reader into the thread because I am looking for feedback.  This is because my prosaic titles have resulted in my posts being glazed over and ignored completely.  It appears that modesty defeats the purpose of why I am here: critique, consensus and brainstorming.  I make no claims of superiority over the other designers here and I do not wish to invalidate them; my claim of superiority is only over what I perceive to be classical rpg conventions.
Logged
whoknowswhynot
Member

Posts: 55

MAYA the RPG


WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2010, 09:01:33 PM »

Well its a really interesting system.  I am having trouble wrapping my brain around it all.  Could you post your website for it again?  I want to check it out a little closer!
Logged

We are equal beings and the universe is our relations with each other. The universe is made of one kind of entity: each one is alive, each determines the course of his own existence.
Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2010, 06:05:16 AM »

Well its a really interesting system.  I am having trouble wrapping my brain around it all.  Could you post your website for it again?  I want to check it out a little closer!

This dice system has nothing to do with my other stuff.  I designed this to be used with a future game; one that was fast-paced and played without a battle grid.  So, this is really all I have right now, unless if you want to see my prototype designs.

Also, I do not have a website of my own, but I post most of my work here.
Logged
David C
Member

Posts: 262

lost in the woods...


« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2010, 09:20:41 AM »

All I can think of is "Thac0 tables"
Logged

...but enjoying the scenery.
Charlie Gilb
Member

Posts: 42


WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2010, 12:22:11 PM »

All I can think of is "Thac0 tables"

If this is meant as a critique, then I agree.

The math in your design here works out just fine, and the basic thrust of what you are trying to do makes sense, but I think your chart is problematic for a few reasons. First, it's not all that intuitive. Your critical threat ranges fluctuate (obviously the need to for the math to work out properly). This makes the 'handling time' for resolving a roll take more time, as the chart will need to be frequently referenced. Granted it isn't terribly complicated, and given time, I imagine people could learn it, but I really think that you can achieve your goal with something A LOT simpler. Does that make sense?

Maybe it's against my personal tastes, so you can take or leave this next bit, but why are critical failure tables necessary? Why are they fun?

That leads to my next question: what kind of game would you use this system in? You say that it would be for something 'fast-paced', and I am curious what you mean. To me, consulting charts and rolling on critical failure tables does not seem fast-paced at all.





Logged

Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2010, 06:42:25 PM »

I designed the dice chart with modular granularity in mind, that is that it could be modified to suit differing levels of complexity.  Let's say I made a Ninja Gaiden RPG: in order to make it fast-paced, I would remove the critical failure tables (because ninjas don't trip on their own swords) as well as Dice Rank 8 and 9 (so I took two people's suggestions and applied them without any fundamental alterations to the system - thank you for the ideas).  Furthermore, I would incorporate the rules I designed with the dice system because combat is resolved verbally, without grids or concrete distance increments.  Damage rolls will also be done away with, because it will be based upon the dice rank's effective range: 3= hurt the opponent, 2= cripple (like cutting off a demon's arm), and 1= kill.  I will present the rough draft in my next post.

What can this method do that many other methods cannot?  Scale well: high-powered opponents won't find themselves scoring hits on each other on every single blow, removing the need for inordinate amounts of hp, or even separate defense values.  Secondly, it properly mediates the balance between fortune and ability.  Lastly, it removes a significant amount of cumbersome aritmetic: instead of rolling XdX+skill+attribute+/-situational modifier and then rolling damage+strength+skill bonus+situational bonus, you simply switch the dice you use, e.g. a d12 to a d10. 
Logged
Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2010, 07:37:43 PM »

The following is a rough draft system to be used with the graduated dice method:
Logged
stefoid
Member

Posts: 319


WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 31, 2010, 07:36:16 PM »

I like it.  The Window  http://www.mimgames.com/window/   uses that mechanic.  I adopted it for an abandoned system a while ago.  I ordered some special d14 (or was it 16?) sided dice to even out the leap between d12 and d20 and also a couple of d30s.  so I used d3,d4,d6,d8,d10,d12,d14,d20,d30   (d3 being a d6 with appropriately marked sides)

I think it would work well for a system where you didnt actually have a lot of modfidiers and a whole heap of 'skills'.  Then you dont have to hunt for the right dice to use so much.  If you only have a handfull of skills, you can pretty much have those dice on hand, easilly pick up the correct one when you need to, roll it and everyone can instantly see the result without having to worry about math or modifiers after the role, etc...
Logged

Locke
Member

Posts: 85


« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2010, 06:37:24 AM »

Earthdawn by FASA used a similar system.  It was  kinda cool because you could customize your character in different ways.  Check it out.  I don't know who owns it now.

Logged

Check out my game Age Past, unique rolling system, in Beta now.  Tell me what you think!
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B-7APna9ZhHEZmRhNmFmODktOTgxNy00NDllLTk0MjgtMjI4YzJlN2MyNmEw&hl=en

Thanks!
Jeff Mechlinski
Ar Kayon
Member

Posts: 190


« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2010, 02:13:04 PM »

That's interesting.  I created these mechanics without preceding knowledge of Earthdawn.  However, it seems as if Earthdawn's mechanics scale in the opposite direction.  In my opinion, that is more cumbersome.

Now I now it's futile to try to create completely original mechanics.  I can, however, create original executions of mechanics by tailoring them specifically to my goals and setting designs.  I suppose I should look at it from the viewpoint of, "So what if they did it first - we can do it BETTER!"
Logged
Gurnard
Member

Posts: 29


« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2010, 05:18:32 PM »

This is something I came up with a while ago that might give you some ideas. It's a different way around it, but I was essentially shooting for the same thing, higher skill levels equating to both higher median chance of success and more consistent results.
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=27533.0
Logged
Luminous
Member

Posts: 43

Master of mayhem...


« Reply #14 on: April 07, 2010, 09:45:37 PM »

http://www.mimgames.com/window/

Similar concept, less math and less complication.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!