I'm wondering if it is possible to have a funcitonal resolution system that is, in and of itself a hybrid of two or more of Drama, Fortune, and Karma. Specifically, I'm not referring to games which allow the use of more than one system (i.e. using Drama sometimes, Fortune other times, and Drama the remainder of times). I would refer to such games as having a mixed resolution system for the purposes of my question.

As an example, a game I am currently working on has a resolution system that seems like a hybrid to me. Basically, the character traits used in the conflict resolution system can run very high (up to 16). They are combined with a die roll (2d4) which has a bell curve distribution and a limited range of possible results. So, for the most part, this means that the trait will, in general, determine the result of the conflict, with chance playing only a small part in it. Personally, I like this system, even though it means there will be times when a character simply cannot win a conflict. If I fought Mike Tyson in a thousand matches, I'd lose every time, with the only question being how injured I was.

So, does the fact that there's a die roll in the system make it automatically Fortune, even though the die roll has a relatively minor effect? If not, would you consider this to be a hybrid resolution mechanic? If so, can such a hybrid resolution mechanic be functional? Have I simply misunderstood the DFK terms?

Any thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

It's possible I might be able to answer your question, but I'd prefer to see what the old hands have first.

In fact I'd like to add my own question. If diceless/non random resolution is something like I have five in strength and jim and three, thus I win...what is it when I have five and jim has three, but we both always add 6D6 to our scores.

Of course, 6D6 has an even stronger bell curve than 2D4. It's almost the same as the diceless/non random/fortuneless method in terms of results given. I'm guessing the answer is that it's still forture, but I'm curious as to thoughts on the matter.

Fortune systems can easily devolve into Karma. All you have to do, is make it so that no result will result in a success or a failure. Does this make the system a "hybrid"? You could call it that.

Fred,

I'm not saying that the system will always result in no chance of success (or failure). In my example, I'm saying that in most cases, the result will be the same as if straight Karma were used. But, in some cases (most often when the opposing characters have identical or very close trait ratings), chance will play a role similar to a straight Fortune system.

I'm not great at probablities, but I'm thinking that the example I gave would usually generate the same results as straight Karma, but would still operate like Fortune a significant percentage of the time.

I think that the traditional definition says that the input of fortune at any level makes a resolution system a fortune system. I believe in Fudge a character with a Superb trait will lose to a rolled opposed Terrible trait 1 in 6561 times. Still, that is the kind of the point of it being a fortune system... there is the chance, however minute that the Terrible trait will come out victorious.

But lets say that there is NO chance of a character missing, often times the roll is made anyway. At the very least it gives additional input into the shared imagninative space.... "it was close, but you nail him" vs "you split open his skull". In other instances there are additional mechanical benefits for good rolls that are still a function of fortune... critical successes, metagame points and possible advancement. This is still a byproduct of the fortune system in a particular game.

You can end up with hybrid systems even in traditional games. Consider a D&D game where a character with a +26 attack bonus attacks an opponent with an AC 10. If you are not playing with the rule where a "1" is always a miss, the "to hit" portion of the resolution is karmic. There is no way that the character can miss. However, there is a fortune element... the damage roll (which could also be Karmic as well if the opponent has -9 HP and you are wielding the +10 3D6 Great Sword of Slaying). Again, I would still have the character roll the damage here as the character rolling a 3 in this instance would create a different impression in the SIS than an 18.

I know many people don't play that way though.

Regards,
Mark

Andrew Morris wrote: Basically, the character traits used in the conflict resolution system can run very high (up to 16). They are combined with a die roll (2d4) which has a bell curve distribution and a limited range of possible results. So, for the most part, this means that the trait will, in general, determine the result of the conflict, with chance playing only a small part in it.

Karma
Resolution based on comparison of Effectiveness values alone.
Fortune
A method of resolution employing unpredictable non-behavioral elements, usually based on physical objects such as dice, cards, or similar..

Andrew Morris wrote: So, does the fact that there's a die roll in the system make it automatically Fortune, even though the die roll has a relatively minor effect?

I'm realy not sure what Drama resolution is. Do you mean resolution based on the use of player resources that don't represent anything in the game world, like Hero Points or player votes?

If that is the case, then in some sense any game which has fixed attributes, modified by a random roll but with some analogue of Hero Points, could be considered to be a three-way hybrid system. HeroQuest for example.


Simon Hibbs

Andrew (Morris), your assertion that resolution mechanics are possible that are hybrids of drama, fortune, and/or karma is correct. In fact, they are the norm; a "pure" resolution system is the more unusual case (though such cases certainly do exist).

Take a look at this thread, which wholeheartedly confirms a longstanding consensus on this point.

- Walt

Walt,

Thanks for that link. I tried searching for this concept in old threads, but I missed that one.