Different Resolution Mechanics

[Drachasor]

I've been thinking a lot about resolution mechanics lately.  Has anyone ever gone through and done an examination of the pros and cons of different mechanics?

By this I mean comparing say d20+Mods; Skill+Whatever dXs where each dice needs to hit a threshold (with a possibly movable threshold); Fudge Dice; etc.

I thought there might be something out there I could take a look at.  Otherwise I'll do the math on my own.

[Thriff]

Drach,

First: you'll need to post a link to an external source that shows what you're working on or else this thread'll be shut down. Thems the rules.

Sorry but I haven't done a comprehensive analysis of every resolution mechanics invented (or stumbled across by me). I suspect there are others here that would have a better idea of the pros and cons of each but you've posed a very difficult question.

Mostly beause I think, in its current form, that your question is unanswerable. Pros and cons are very subjective terms and for me (/anyone here) to help you you'll have to provide more information on what you want. (Thus the aforementioned rules).

GNS would be one good place to start.

Until then...

T

[Drachasor]

Mostly beause I think, in its current form, that your question is unanswerable. Pros and cons are very subjective terms and for me (/anyone here) to help you you'll have to provide more information on what you want. (Thus the aforementioned rules).

I have to disagree with that.  The probabilistic spread certainly is something quite objective.  How significant various forms of modifiers are to that spread and their effect on chance is also an objective thing to discuss.

I think GNS becomes relevant when you talk about what conflicts there are to resolve and what/how modifiers work into a resolution.  For what it is worth, I was thinking of a gamist game.  That said, how does that matter if we are just discussing in what form you role dice (or whatever) to work towards resolving an unspecified conflict?

Is it really true one can't have an purely theoretical discussion on resolution mechanics on this forum?  That seems rather odd (and I grant you could interpret the forum guidelines in that manner).  I guess if that really ends up being the case, I'll go somewhere else.

[Thriff]

Drach,

Rules: link to external work.

The probabilistic spread certainly is something quite objective. How significant various forms of modifiers are to that spread and their effect on chance is also an objective thing to discuss.

. Probabalistic spreads (exclusively) are not, by my definition, resolution mechanics--however, they are certainly objective and definitely welcome to be discussed here.

Here is an example of someone playing with such spreads with an online aid: http://anydice.com/program/9af. Click on "graph", beyond that I don't know how to operate the interface, but I hope the link helps. It won't tell you "pros and cons" of various dice combinations, but it will give you a probability spread .

T

[Drachasor]

Drach,

Rules: link to external work.

Yeah, as far as I can tell that's not an actual rule.

The probabilistic spread certainly is something quite objective. How significant various forms of modifiers are to that spread and their effect on chance is also an objective thing to discuss.

. Probabalistic spreads (exclusively) are not, by my definition, resolution mechanics--however, they are certainly objective and definitely welcome to be discussed here.

Using dice in some manner  with some sort of modifier (fixed numbers or modifying dice rolled) and comparing them against a fixed number or opposed roll to resolve things are a type of resolution mechanic.  In fact, it is the most common sort of resolution mechanic.  Discussing how probabilistic spreads relates to that is certainly relevant and seems to fall under the rough heading of resolution mechanics.

I'm a bit confused on how "welcome" you seem to think this is given that you also seem to think this thread will be deleted.

Here is an example of someone playing with such spreads with an online aid: http://anydice.com/program/9af. Click on "graph", beyond that I don't know how to operate the interface, but I hope the link helps. It won't tell you "pros and cons" of various dice combinations, but it will give you a probability spread .

Well, that might work.  Thanks.

[dreamborn]

Using dice in some manner  with some sort of modifier (fixed numbers or modifying dice rolled) and comparing them against a fixed number or opposed roll to resolve things are a type of resolution mechanic.  In fact, it is the most common sort of resolution mechanic.  Discussing how probabilistic spreads relates to that is certainly relevant and seems to fall under the rough heading of resolution mechanics.

IMO, and the way I designed my gaming system (Omnificent Role playing System) dice have by their very nature a quantization issue (they have discrete values).  Therefore I don't use dice, I perform a 'draw' from a dynamically created probability density function (pdf).  Many, many, many things go into creating the pdf,  The amount of things included and how they interact with each other add realism to the pdf.  The draw when compared to the characters proficiency with a particular skill can be used to determine success.

Kent
www.dreamborn.com

[Kyles Games]

The resolution system is actually the reason I wrote Orchestra, ironically, with the setting just being chosen based on my influences at the time (Deus Ex, E.Y.E: Divine Cybermancy, mind.in.a.box, Eclipse Phase, Shadowrun, Firefly, etc.). Similarly, all my other games are attempts to mesh a specific setting with a resolution mechanic I feel would work well:

Transhuman zombie survival: 2d20 (basically percentile but not, since you just read the plain number, I chose this for a distribution curve that still allowed flexibility for each little thing, since the transhumanism theme allows a massive amount of detail with minimal bookkeeping)
"Biblepunk" (biblical era Palestine): 1d10 (may change) plus a resolution pool, allows players who are specialized in an area to always win (the Roman legionnaire will almost always crush any opponent because he can put a lot of bonus points into each fight.
Action Movie: d100, because that's a nice quick way to do things and action heroes are pretty linear in terms of ability, as opposed to the more human zombie survivors who are never really good at something or really bad, with average being, well, average.

Anyhow, there is a rule to show content, read the sticky at the top of the subforum. I'm back to my papers (two 5-page essays due within one day of each other? Really?)

[Ar Kayon]

The spread of probability is important, but so are other factors:
Originality - doubtful we will create something truly original, but if the mechanics truly interface with your game, then you can make them unique
How using the mechanics make players feel - is the resolution represented in an exciting manner?  Are the mechanics interactive and allow players to make complex or meaningful decisions?
The mechanics' relationship to the game - e.g. my game is set in the future, so I chose to use percentage dice, in which chance of success could literally be revealed to players if they are wearing smart armor or using computerized weaponry: "My scope reads 40%; I'm going to wait to take the shot," says Lo Ordin.
How mechanics are translated - are the resolutions simultaneously representative of different things?  Do you interpret rolls as either success or fail?  Or are they represented as "if you roll this, this happens and if you roll that, these things happen"?

[Roguelantern]

Some pros and cons of different dice resolution systems are covered here, it's not a complete analysis but gives you a starting point:

http://darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/systemdesign/dice-methods.html

I'd probably design a resolution probability curve for the game first. Then, I'd either find or design a dice system which gives that probability curve as an output. You see, unless you are trying to make a new mechanic, there is no need to go through everything on the market.

If you area really into gamist approach, you might want to consider making some probability chain analysis for your game as well. There is a well established Markov Chain theory which you can use. Check it from the Wikipedia. It's very helpful for balancing gamist type games.

It would really help if you could post a link to your work, so we could understand better what you are after.

[Callan S.]

Drachasor,
In the sticky post at the top of the forum:

Some available document is absolutely required, preferably through a link.

It can just be a link to your blog or such, where your just outlining what your trying to get at with a game your thinking of making. And I'll say on forums I've been annoyed by people citing rules which sound like they are making it up, and I could understand someone getting that impression from replies on the rules in this thread, so far. Sayin' to try and give a sympathetic nod towards you on the matter.

I have to disagree with that.  The probabilistic spread certainly is something quite objective.  How significant various forms of modifiers are to that spread and their effect on chance is also an objective thing to discuss.

The amount of spice chemicals in a chili is an objective, measurable amount. However, to one person it'll be nice, to another it's agony.

It's a long draw of the bow on my part, but maybe your looking for concrete methods of crafting a 'good' game and your starting at the start with looking at base probability options.

If you find it, please tell me, because I'm not joking, I'd like to know. I can see no real headway on the matter, except to stoop to a game which plays complete sycophancy to the players egos (you know the type - you play a hero who's always killing, can't be killed (though we'll give the impression of mortal danger) and is never morally wrong no matter how many kobold orphans he leaves behind). Sycophancy is the only definite 'good game' quality I've ever found - and dice resolution mechanics don't really matter in regard to it, as long as the player wins at them (while perhaps giving the impression they can lose, so as to heighten the sycophancy).

Beyond that, like the chili, it becomes a matter of atleast making something that 'tastes good' to you. Sure, you can check out the probability spreads - but can such a spread feel good to you on it's own, sans any fictional context?

It might be better to talk about what fiction grips and excites you. But if you can feel something from probability spreads, hey, hit me up with that.

[Richard]

As I'm being a bit thick - is this a discussion about different combinations of dice for a "roll over/under X", or a comparison of entirely different systems (such as dicepools, infinite dice, etc.)?

[gtroc]

Yeah, as far as I can tell that's not an actual rule.

Here is the rule.

[Ron Edwards]

This thread is (belatedly) closed.

Guys, I greatly appreciate your attention to the standards for the forum. However, please notify me through the "report" button when someone does this. Otherwise they'll merely defy you and capitalize on your well-intentioned discussion points along the way. If a person can't respect the rule, then they shouldn't get your feedback.

Best, Ron