The Forge Archives

Hello all,
As promised, here is my latest RPG project, Pollies.  Below are excerpts from the main document (which is not yet ready to be put on my website.)  Mostly I am interested in feedback on the mechanics, which I like to think are pretty interesting.  Any feedback anyone has to offer would be greatly appreciated!  Specifically, I'm curious if my mechanics are boring or have been done before.

*  *  *

Introduction
Hi there. This RPG system is called Pollies, short for "polyhedral dice." Pollies is a generic system that can be easily tailored to any setting, and it is designed to facilitate story creation.

Why Does This Game Exist?
I had several goals in mind when I came up with these mechanics. First, I wanted a game that would allow me to pay as little attention to rules as possible. I've played, run, and created role-playing games in which the GM must select a very specific target number for each and every task the characters attempt, and I wanted to ease the burden such mechanics place on the GM while maintaining some ability to present the players with differing levels of challenge.  In Pollies, the GM chooses between 6 difficulty levels, and can let fate decide from there what the actual target number will be.

Second, I wanted a game that would be robust enough to handle differing levels of character ability with equal facility. Too many games I have seen work well when a character's skill level is "average" or nearer the middle of the scale, but start to fall apart when character abilities are either very high or very low.  Pollies limits the trait levels to 6, but within each trait level there is sufficient variation in results to keep things interesting.

Third, I wanted a system that could be used in any setting with minimal modifications and add-on rules. While there are myriad other "universal" systems out there, many of them simply add rule upon rule to handle the various situations that can arise in different campaign settings.  With Pollies, all you need is a setting-specific skill list.

Levels
The core of the Pollies system is centered around the concept of levels. Character skills and task difficulties are measured in six levels, numbered (and loosely defined) as follows:

4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 20

A level 4 skill reflects a novice with little or no training or experience.
A level 4 difficulty is an easy task.

A level 6 skill reflects a trained beginner.
A level 6 difficulty is an average difficulty for a professional.

A level 8 skill reflects a trained professional with average skill.
A level 8 difficulty is challenging for a professional.

A level 10 skill reflects an expert professional with years of experience.
A level 10 difficulty is challenging for a master.

A level 12 skill reflects mastery of a skill.
A level 12 difficulty is a true test, very difficult.

A level 20 skill reflects legendary mastery, a lifetime of study and practice.
A level 20 difficulty is about as tough as a task can get - extremely difficult.

Task Resolution
The GM tells the player when to roll, which skill to use, and the difficulty level of the task.

Roll an X-sided die for the skill, where X is the skill level. Roll a Y-sided die for the difficulty, where Y is the difficulty level.

For example, a character with an archery skill level of 8 trying to hit a bull's-eye in target practice (difficulty level 6) would roll an 8-sided die to represent the skill level, and a 6-sided die to represent the difficulty level of the task.

In the case of opposed rolls, there is no difficulty die; the two (or more) opponents simply roll their skill dice and compare the results.

If the skill roll is greater than the difficulty roll, the PC succeeds. If the difficulty roll is greater than the skill roll, the PC fails. If the results are equal, the GM adjudicates.

Critical Results (Dumb Luck)
If one die comes up 1 and the other die comes up with the maximum possible result, it is a critical result. Something out the ordinary happens, either to the benefit or detriment of the PC, subject to GM interpretation.

Task Resolution Guidelines
Level 6 is the default difficulty for tasks.

Levels may be inserted at the GM's option. For example, if you have 16-sided dice available then you may wish to insert 16 as an additional level. If, on the other hand, you don't like having 20 as a level, you may remove it.

*  *  *

...And that's the basics of Pollies.  Thanks for reading, and I'd be happy to answer any questions anyone has.

One final question I promised Mike Holmes I would answer: Is this a personal use system, or do I want to try and get others to use it?

Well, first and foremost, Pollies is a personal-use system.  I am going to use it as my personal house system, and use it as a platform for my various setting ideas.  (Assuming the playtests go well.)

That being said, I think it would be cool if it got some use outside of my gaming circle.  I'm not planning on selling Pollies (obviously) but I would not be adverse to the system achieving a bit of notoriety and possibly attracting a cult following of fanatically devoted minions who would do my bidding.
-e.

You might enjoy my S cinematic/realistic combat system for Pollies on my site.

Interesting

I have a feeling that I've seen dice-based difficulty mechanics somewhere before, but I can't put my finger on the source right now.  In any case, I like the simplicity of your system.  A few thoughts:

1) Does the rolled difficulty say anything about the task itself (i.e. a low roll would mean the task was somehow easier than expected, a high roll might indicate some unforseen complications)?  One interesting part of these mechanics is that, in many ways, you are giving an attribute to the challange and giving the challange a chance to triumph over the challanger.

2) Following along the same lines, opposed rolls aren't really any different than normal rolls.  You're just rolling against the attribute of the other character instead of the attribute given to the challange.  You've basically built a system that only uses opposed rolls (which is the form I might've seen similar mechanics in).

3) You said 6 is the default difficulty, but what would be a default attribute?  I suppose it would depend some on the campaign style and how often you wanted the characters to fail.  But a basic default might be either D8 or D10, since you want skilled characters to have a pretty decent chance of succeeding most of the time.  That doesn't leave you much room for advancement, of course, and the jump from D12 to D20 is HUGE (a whole 8 points).  I might suggest sticking something in between (like D12+D4) to make things a little more even.  That would also let you go higher than D20 (D20+D4, D20+D6, D20+D8... 2D20).  Of course, all of that would lessen the simplicity of your system and make it more closely resemble some other games that are out there, so I'm of two minds about it.

Just some thoughts.

Later.
Jonathan

OK, my two cents, such as it is.

Quote...Specifically, I'm curious if my mechanics are boring or have been done before.

Not to be sarcastic, but it's probably yes on both counts. Mechanics are boring, it's what you do with them that's exciting. And it's been my experience that nearly everything has been done before. So don't let that point bother you.

QuoteThird, I wanted a system that could be used in any setting with minimal modifications and add-on rules.

Ah, the old universal system idea. There's an old thread here. on the subject. If you use the search feature, you'll probably find more.

QuoteThe core of the Pollies system is centered around the concept of levels. Character skills and task difficulties are measured in six levels, numbered (and loosely defined) as follows:

4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 20

If you haven't already, check out The Window, which uses a similar dice level skewing thing.

I can't help but wonder why you have level 4 at all. It sounds like a mosquito, an annoying little thing that really shouldn't be a problem but that that bastard goes right for your ear and you flip out, if you get what I'm saying. I can see no reason for a player to ever take a skill at level 4 since it will almost always be useless unless you're trying something so rediculously easy rolling seems redundant (and that mosquito again when you blow it anyway) It looks more like players would need to have skills of at least 6, preferably higher, which should mean fewer skills purchased at a higher level. I don't know if this is what you want, but I see this happening.

Also, do not have the GM adjucate ties. Were it me, I would either simply have the player succeed when rolling against a task difficulty number and have the higher skilled player succeed in opposed rolls. Something solid.

Conceptually I like how clean it is...but it seems to me at first blush to provide a pretty wide range of possible out comes...what we've been calling randomness on another thread.  

with a low difficult roll, even a putz can pull off the impossible, with a low skill roll even a master can whiff a basic task.

Is that intentional?  Have you see this come up in play?

Quote from: Andrew MartinYou might enjoy my S cinematic/realistic combat system for Pollies on my site.

Thanks for the tip.  I've taken a look, and you have some cool things going there, but your system is far more detailed than I like to get in my games.  I'm a lazy GM at heart, and the lighter the rules the better.  I stop just short of scene-style combat handling.

Case in point, here's the entirety of the Combat section of Pollies:

Quote
Combatants take turns doing things. That's about as detailed as the author feels that a combat system needs to get. Other GMs may freely insert combat management rules such as initiative rolls, combat rounds, and the like.

If the target of an attack takes an active role in defending herself, the combat task is an opposed roll. Otherwise, the GM sets a difficulty based on her assessment of the situation and the task is an unopposed roll.

First, yes Jonathan, this is a perfect example of an "all opposed" system (or you could say its just a single resolution system if you prefer). And as such I applaud it; no surprise there.

e (which stands for?),

I'd suggest that you should put up examples of your task desccriptions. The word "average" does not evoke much, nor does "easy". These are relative terms. Which applies to braodjumping ten feet? If, as I assume, "easy" tasks are not trivial, that even they are potentially tricky, then I think things start to focus more.

Why not lower the scale a bit, and include d3 and d2? These can all be simulated easily by dice available for the rest of the system. This would give you a bit more range.

See also the game Orx for an indie system from the Forge that uses similar dice mechanics. There was a discussion of the game I think (or another similar one) in which a discussion of the d12 to d20 shift was discussed (Raven's answer was that it should be big).

If a player wants a character that's strong, how does he simulate that? Just like a skill? Does eveyone start with a Strength of 6 essentially, or..what?

Can you speak to any other design goals? Are you looking for the system to stay out of the way? Are you looking to promote any particular part of play?

Can you let us in on CharGen? Or any other part of the system?

Once we have more data, we can more coherently post.

Mike

Quote from: Jonathan WaltonI have a feeling that I've seen dice-based difficulty mechanics somewhere before, but I can't put my finger on the source right now.

FUDGE kinda-sorta has a similar idea, but it's all incorporated into one roll of 4dF.

Quote1) Does the rolled difficulty say anything about the task itself?

If I were to describe how I visualize the rolls, I would call the difficulty die a reflection of fortune.  A daunting task with a diff of 12 might not be as hard as it appeared (die comes up 3).  The difficulty die represents in essence the myriad factors working against the character, factors that it is ridiculous to expect the GM to know about and reflect in a selection of a more specific target number.

Quote2) Following along the same lines, opposed rolls aren't really any different than normal rolls.  You're just rolling against the attribute of the other character instead of the attribute given to the challange.  You've basically built a system that only uses opposed rolls (which is the form I might've seen similar mechanics in).

Yes, I was somewhat influenced by the discussions here and there on the Forge about opposed rolls.  I separate the two concepts in the rules document for the sake of making the system more easily palatable to readers - trying to follow the lingo of the hobby, etc.  But you're correct - all the rolls are opposed.

Quote3) You said 6 is the default difficulty, but what would be a default attribute?

Do you mean the default for an untrained initiate, or the "average" level of skill?  For the former, it depends, but probably 4.  (more on that below.)  For the latter, 8.

Quote(like D12+D4) to make things a little more even.  That would also let you go higher than D20 (D20+D4, D20+D6, D20+D8... 2D20).

Interesting.  But I think I prefer the fewer dice.  I agree that adding a 16 level would be cool, but d16s aren't exactly common.

Quote from: Jack Spencer Jr

Quote...Specifically, I'm curious if my mechanics are boring or have been done before.

Not to be sarcastic, but it's probably yes on both counts. Mechanics are boring, it's what you do with them that's exciting. And it's been my experience that nearly everything has been done before. So don't let that point bother you.

LOL.  Point taken.  :)

QuoteIf you haven't already, check out The Window, which uses a similar dice level skewing thing.

Yes.  The Window is a significant influence, but the differing dice for skill levels is about the only thing I liked about it, so I pilfered it.

QuoteI can't help but wonder why you have level 4 at all.

4 is there for a couple reasons:
- Skill level defaults for people with no experience in the trait.
- Difficulty die for tasks that are easy but either I want to make more dramatic for the player or for tasks that are very important to the direction the story takes.

Love the mosquito analogy. :)

QuoteAlso, do not have the GM adjucate ties. Were it me, I would either simply have the player succeed when rolling against a task difficulty number and have the higher skilled player succeed in opposed rolls. Something solid.

Hmm.  Nope, don't agree.  Here's why:

Say a character with a trait of 6 against difficulty 20 rolls a tie.  There's a 5% chance of that happening vs. and 82.5% chance of failure.  As a GM I might want to evaluate the situation and weigh how important it is for the character to succeed, how much valor it took for a character with a low skill to attempt such a task, and how well the player has been role-playing during the session.  Maybe that tie means that the character failed, but something cool happened to the advantage of the character.  Or maybe it means the character succeeded but something unfortunate happens as a result of that success.

If the rules are "solid," as you say, then the character fails, no question.  It's a simple preference as a GM - I like to have the option to exploit the dice to inject a little more drama.

Incidentally, I originally wrote Pollies so that ties meant the advantage went to the larger die.  But I changed it later.  This is one of the things that I want to look at carefully during playtest.

Quote from: Valamirwith a low difficult roll, even a putz can pull off the impossible, with a low skill roll even a master can whiff a basic task.

Is that intentional?

Sort of.  the idea behind the system is that a GM, being not physically a part of the setting world, and definitely not an all-knowing all-seeing entity, cannot possibly know all the factors that are working against a character.  The idea is for the GM to think about the situation for the .5 or so seconds it takes to pick from the 6 difficulty levels, and then stop worrying about it and let the dice do the work.

In my opinion, likelihood of success or failure is less important than keeping the story fun, interesting, and flowing.

Plus, I wrote a little program to calculate the odds for me when I first thought of the idea, and the probabilities are pretty in line with a lot of other systems.

For example, a 20 level skill vs. a 4 difficulty:
Success: 87.5%
Failure: 7.5%
Tie: 5%

An 8 skill vs. a 6 difficulty (the "averages"):
Success: 56.25%
Failure: 31.25%
Tie: 12.5%

Yes, a master can whiff, and a putz can pull off the impossible.  But that's true (in varying degrees) with nearly every single system I've ever seen.  What I have found interesting in developing Pollies is that with the difficulty so random, it seems like the probabilities are more wacked out than they actually are.  I dig that.

Quote from: silkwormWhat I have found interesting in developing Pollies is that with the difficulty so random, it seems like the probabilities are more wacked out than they actually are.  I dig that.

That's definitely true.  What you've got is a system that seems (and probably even feels) chaotic, which (if you were going to pair it with a specific or default setting) could be used to your advantage.  I would imagine the players, especially at first, would be a little intimidated by the "overwhelming randomness," which would make it good for a horror or conspiracy game, or something stranger (like post-modern gaming weirdness).

It could be compared to the feel of rolling, say, 20dF.  Now, rolling that many Fudge dice is pretty likely to give you a roll between +1 and -1, since most of the dice are just going to cancel each other out, but it certainly doesn't FEEL that way.  It feels like you're pretty likely to either die or become God.

Something interesting to explore, in a seperate thread on the Theory board: how could you construct a set of mechanics that feel a certain way but are actually very different?

Later.
Jonathan

Quote from: Mike Holmese (which stands for?)

Ethan, if you must know. ;)

QuoteI'd suggest that you should put up examples of your task desccriptions. The word "average" does not evoke much, nor does "easy".

Good point.  However, I've left things intentionally vague to give myself some wiggle room and to make the system universal.  In a game with pixie PCs, it wouldn't be "easy" to broadjump 10 feet.  It would be impossible.  (And stupid for a pixie to try - they can fly!)

On the other hand, in a fantasy world populated by humans, broadjumping ten feet might be 6.

And yes, it's true that with Pollies I will only make the players roll on tasks which have significant difficulties or that are important for the story.

QuoteWhy not lower the scale a bit, and include d3 and d2?

It's certainly an option, but I'm not sure it's necessary.  Still need to playtest.  I should probably mention the 2 and 3-siders in Task Resolution Guidelines as an option along with the d16.

QuoteSee also the game Orx for an indie system from the Forge that uses similar dice mechanics.

Neat!  I've skimmed it and will go back to read it more fully.  Good presentation, good writing.

QuoteThere was a discussion of the game I think (or another similar one) in which a discussion of the d12 to d20 shift was discussed (Raven's answer was that it should be big).

It isn't really that big.  to illustrate:

Skill 10 vs. Difficulty 6:
Success: 65%
Failure: 25%
Tie: 10%

Skill 12 vs. Difficulty 6:
Success: 70.8333%
Failure: 20.8333%
Tie: 8.3333%

Skill 20 vs. Difficulty 6:
Success: 82.5%
Failure: 12.5%
Tie: 5%

12 to 20 is a bigger jump than from 10 to 12, yes, but I'm okay with it since my goal is drama.  In addition, 20 will probably be reserved for extraordinary circumstances in my games.  In that application it does make sense for 20 to be a little special.

QuoteIf a player wants a character that's strong, how does he simulate that? Just like a skill?

Skills only, no "attributes."  In the case of Strength, I would use a Strength skill.

QuoteCan you let us in on CharGen? Or any other part of the system?

I can do that.  From the Pollies document:

QuoteCharacters
At a basic level, a character consists of a list of skills and their levels. Exactly how a character is created is a matter of taste for players and GM, but the author's preferred method is supplied as a guideline:

Step 1: Character Background
Think up a character and write down a paragraph or two about her. Make sure to address the following topics:

- What is the character's name?
- What does the character look like? Include a brief physical description and common mode of dress.
- Who are the character's parents and siblings, and how does the character get along with her family?
- What does the character like to do, and/or at what does she excel?
- What is the character's greatest liability?

Once you have finished your background, show it to the GM for discussion and approval. Once the GM approves the character background, go on to the next step.

Step 2: Skills
Peruse the skill list that the GM has provided for the game. Keeping in mind the character background, choose skills and assign levels as you deem them appropriate.

Once you have finished choosing skills, show the GM for further discussion and final approval. Once that approval has been obtained, the character is complete and ready to play.

Actually, the character creation is the one thing that has been playtested (I initialy developed them for a previous project) and they work great, at least for me.

Hi Ethan,

Quote from: silkwormGood point.  However, I've left things intentionally vague to give myself some wiggle room and to make the system universal.  In a game with pixie PCs, it wouldn't be "easy" to broadjump 10 feet.  It would be impossible.  (And stupid for a pixie to try - they can fly!)

On the other hand, in a fantasy world populated by humans, broadjumping ten feet might be 6.

So they are relative. What you need to do then for each world is to give guidelines for what ccounts as what. These can be objective (like broadjumping distance) or dramatic, which would tell you how often it makes sense to pose a particular difficulty.

QuoteAnd yes, it's true that with Pollies I will only make the players roll on tasks which have significant difficulties or that are important for the story.

Which most games claim to do as well. The problem is that often in the text it does not give any guidelines as to what counts as dramatic or significant. Everybody knows not to roll for crossing the street, so don't say that. Tell us if rolling to haggle for the cost of equipment is valid. Tell us how much actual danger must be present to roll. Give guidelines. Can players call for rolls? Or just the GM?

QuoteSkills only, no "attributes."  In the case of Strength, I would use a Strength skill.

I get that. We call that a "single level" system (as opposed to say a Skill/Attribute system, say). But I'd suggest calling them something more generic like Traits. Skills implies to most "abilities gained by training". While one can do Strength training, it's just not what most people think of as a skill. Most single level systems use the term Traits or Abilities. Or perhaps you can come up with a better term.

In any case, the question is, what is the default? d4, which you imply is untrained? This makes a character "average"? Or is d6 "average" (I put average because we here recognize that the average human is a myth, but the term does serve to make a point)? If d4, the default untrained level is more of less average, then how do you simulate weak characters? This is where you're d2 and d3 could come in.

QuoteAt a basic level, a character consists of a list of skills and their levels. Exactly how a character is created is a matter of taste for players and GM, but the author's preferred method is supplied as a guideline:

So it's essentially freeform creation with GM oversight. That's cool. But if you are going this rout anyhow, why not allow for players to just create their own Traits? You can't be worried about abuse, because that's handled with your current system by GM oversite, which would continue to exist if there were no skill list. Wh not just make a small sample list of typical skills for the world in question to give players the idea of what sort of things are appropriate, and then just allow them to use those, or make up whatever they like? Easier for you, and allows more creativity on the player's part.

See Story Engine (or the free version Story Bones), and my derivative game, Synthesis, for typical examples of games that work this way.

This is just an extension of common rules in skill systems that say that you can create your own skill if it belongs to a category. For example, a lot of games realize that they can never write up all the professions that might exist, and as such have you tailor a "Professionsl" skill. The extension of this is that, as long as a player has an idea of the acceptable scale he'll choose abilities that are of this scope

Given a "non-balanced" game, this does not even matter. A player can take Barbarian as a "Trait" and another can take "Eel Scaling", and it doesn't matter that one far more broad in scope than the others. This only matters in "balanced" CharGen systems.

As many like to point out here, the abilities a player takes is, to an extent, a statment to the GM of what sort of action they'd like to see, or at the very least expect. If they take combat skills, they probably expect combat. If they don't they'll be surprised if it does show up. Allowing players more lattitude in what they can declare as an ability gives them further freedom to define more precisely what they want to see. And they are not canalized to expect certain things because they are all that is available on the skill list. Beware, even a sample list can canalize if not designed well.

OTOH, if canalization is what you want, use your skill list to help the GM get the sort characters that are necessary.

Mike

Quote from: Mike HolmesWhat you need to do then for each world is to give guidelines for what ccounts as what. These can be objective (like broadjumping distance) or dramatic, which would tell you how often it makes sense to pose a particular difficulty.

Say, that's a swell idea!  I'll do that.  (No sarcasm here, I'm actually a goober who uses the word "swell.")

QuoteTell us if rolling to haggle for the cost of equipment is valid. Tell us how much actual danger must be present to roll. Give guidelines. Can players call for rolls? Or just the GM?

More good suggestions, which I shall implement.

QuoteI'd suggest calling them something more generic like Traits.

Ehh, maybe.  Actually in the rough draft, I used Traits, but I switched it to "Skills" in a revision for a reason that I can now not recall.  *shrug*

QuoteIn any case, the question is, what is the default? d4, which you imply is untrained?

Some skills - er, traits, abilities, whatever - will have no default.  Rocket Science, for example.  Other skills, such as Strength or Athletics might have a default of 6 or 8.  Its GM call, I think.  What I'm guessing will happen is, when a player wants their character to do something, and say, "roll on Strength," and they say, "oops, I don't have that," then I'll pause the game and discuss what the level should be.  If the character is a bookworm type, maybe a 4 would be appropriate, but if the character is a professional basketball player, a higher strength of 8 or 10 might be more appropriate.  Without detailed balanced CharGen, this becomes a common sense issue.  In order to minimize such interruptions in the game, I incorporated GM supervision of CharGen.

But your comments are making me realize that I should probably write all this down in the rules document as guidelines.

QuoteSo it's essentially freeform creation with GM oversight. That's cool. But if you are going this rout anyhow, why not allow for players to just create their own Traits?

Here's where some knowledge of my play group is necessary for context.  I have a couple players, one in particular, who flounders without at least some sort of rules framework in place.  Example: I was doing a quick one-off in Fudge, and I told the players to write down whatever skills they wanted.  My player was UNABLE to come up with any skills, despite my suggestions.  Finally, he ended up pulling out a GURPS book and using that as a list.  Which was fine, but led me to the conclusion that my next game should probably have a set skill list!

So, for my group, some structure is pretty much required.  Per your suggestion I will add some guidelines for character creation that cover player-created skills.  If I can I'd like to get the best of both worlds.

Incidentally, thanks to all for the great ideas and critiques.  You've really forced me to look at my assumptions and goals, and helped to solidify them.

Quote from: silkworm

Quote from: Jack Spencer JrI can't help but wonder why you have level 4 at all.

4 is there for a couple reasons:
- Skill level defaults for people with no experience in the trait.
- Difficulty die for tasks that are easy but either I want to make more dramatic for the player or for tasks that are very important to the direction the story takes.

Great thread going here.

My only question thus far is:  Why not just have skills default to 4 when learned/purchased/acquired?

Otherwise there really doesn't seem to be much point for the difficulty level.  Then again maybe it's just me.

If I'm off base let me know, but wouldn't having the skill level default to 4 just be easier?  That way learning skills could be sort of easy, but gaining ability levels in that skill could be hard.  Or something.



Taking my dunce cap and running.