Hey guys.

Posted this on RPGnet, but I'm not getting any responses yet, so I'm shotgunning it here to for a larger feedback pool.

Ok, here's the idea I got going so far. Colored parts are things I need help with.

System Mechanic
Attributes set the number of dice rolled
Skill sets the Target Number (roll under). Each die that rolls equal to or under is called a Hit.
So with a Str of 3 and a Melee skill of 4 and using d6's, I would roll 3d6 and look for 4 or lower

What changes if I make the Attribute the TN and the Skill the Dice Pool? I know my example would then be roll 4d6 and look for 3 or less, but the system I'm currently using, dice pool equates to potential and skill equates to success/failure, right?

Resolving Actions
Task resolution one:
Using a known chart, PC's narrate what they are trying to accomplish and this sets the action Penalty, removed from the dice pool before rolling. Extra Hits beyond the first one can be discarded to further narrate the action. A Task with no Hits is considered a failure.
When assigning penalties, the GM will deterine any and all applicable aspects of the task that can be penalized, like the general difficulty of the task and the time taken to complete the task. the final penalty will follow this formula: (highest penalty value)+1 for each additional augmenting aspect.

Task resolution two:
PC's roll and tally Hits. The PC then removes a number of Hits set by the action's Penalty, set by the GM (which can be known before the roll). The Task fails if this results in zero or less Hits. Any remaining Hits can then be discarded to narrate the task further.

With Task Res 1, the PC knows what he's getting into before the roll and gets a bonus for extra Hits. The PC also gets to know beforehand how much narrative control he/she has.
Task Res 2 looks to be a more simplified way of the system I'm currently using; the narrative control is still pretty random.
Which method is better? Would this change any if I switch the way Attributes and Skills are used?

The penalty chart would look something like this (below). The values I'm assigning here aren't set in stone, but are just here to help with examples. The format is TRes1/TRes2.
Difficulty (General dfficulty; running on a plane vs. running uphill)
-Easy (1/0)
-Challenging (2/1)
-Hard (3/2)
Duration (the length of time a task takes to complete; may be n/a )
-Time x .75 (1/1)
-Time x .5 (2/2)
-Time x .25 (3/3)
Permanence (this sets a difficulty for anyone trying to change/undo your task, like rewrite a software program you created. Can't think of a better name.)
-Easy (1/0)
-Challenging (2/1)
-Hard (3/2)
Damage (The task must be able to inflict Light Trauma first)
-Deadly Trauma (4/3)
Resistance (adds or subtracts dice from the target PC's 'saving throws'; primarily used in magic or social situations)
-+2 dice (0/0)
-no change (1/1)
--2 dice (2/2)

-----

The one thing that stands out for me is that if I go with Task Res 1, the PC gets some free buys. For example, if the PC performs a Hard Task, then he/she can just select any aspects that fall short of the -3 penalty because they'll only add -1 die. So a Hard task could have a 50% time reduction, set a Challenging difficulty for other players, and impose a -2 dice penalties to resist (using the numbers above). I don't know if that's a bad thing, though since I want the player to feel like they have control over the story. I think this might entice players.
Task Res 2 doesn't fix any of the problems I have with my current system other than helping to facilitate design (I don't have to make a chart for every skill). Originally, each skill had a chart next to it (most were redundant). After tallying hits, you discard dice and use the number rolled to purchase a quality, like shortening the time taken. I felt this was ultimately too random (and I couldn't add a skill if I couldn't think of a chart to go with it).
Which is better?

Once I know which one to go with, I can work on getting the numbers right.

Also, though I don't own it, I have seen Zir'An. I actually had something written on notepaper for D&D before White Wolf brought the game out. So rather than sit and say, "Dammit! That's my idea!" I want to try a diiferent way to do the same thing. Any other inspiration material would be appriciated.

I also need help thinking of different aspects of a task that could be modified. Should Quality be one (completing the task or completing the task well)? I plan to use this resolution system in combat as well and a quality aspect could mean more damage or a better defense.

Hi!
  Wwith multiple dice pools and shifting TNs, maybe the difficulty should chang ethe number of hits needed to succeed?
  I think taking the highest applicable penatly in the way to go with these few dice. I know that takinghits after rolling is too harsh. Each penalty will be negating 2, 3 or more dice rolled...
  Good luck man!

dindenver wrote:
Hi!
  Wwith multiple dice pools and shifting TNs, maybe the difficulty should chang ethe number of hits needed to succeed?
  I think taking the highest applicable penatly in the way to go with these few dice. I know that takinghits after rolling is too harsh. Each penalty will be negating 2, 3 or more dice rolled...
  Good luck man!

(editing is turned off, lol)

Ok, so here's what Task Res 2 should say now:
Task resolution two:
PC's roll and tally Hits. The task is a failure until a minimum number of Hits is met, called the Difficulty and set by the GM. Any remaining Hits can then be discarded to narrate the task further.

Well, people are reading it. Is it just not worth commenting on?

Anyway...

Here's the categories so far:
Difficulty
Duration
Permanence
Damage
Resistance
Quality

I want to keep the categories the same and split them into Non-Combat, Combat, and Magic. Difficulty in combat would be things like Cover and Distance and something like disarming an opponent would be a Quality. Is there anything else anyone can think of?

Well, people are reading it. Is it just not worth commenting on?

Dangerboy wrote:
What changes if I make the Attribute the TN and the Skill the Dice Pool? I know my example would then be roll 4d6 and look for 3 or less, but the system I'm currently using, dice pool equates to potential and skill equates to success/failure, right?

I'm looking for a system that gives more narrative control to the players. Unless the game was built to be purely narrative, my experience is that most systems put all the work on the GM and if the GM gives any control to the player, it's house-ruled into the system. Aside from social interaction, it's very easy for the players to just roll their dice and wait for the GM to interpret the outcome.

I guess a typical scenario should work like this (if this example sucks, let me know):

Players have come up to a locked door and want to sneak in...

GM: Alright it's a typical keypad lock; shouldn't be too much trouble if you have a codebreaker, but you don't have one, right? (GM sets difficulty).

P1: Nope, gonna have to do the old pencil-shaving-finger-print trick. (to P2) Are we rushing it?

P2: Faster would be better.

P1: How long will it take?

GM: Ehh... ten minutes.

P1: What? Supposed I get it in one try?

GM: If you want to toss combinations my way, I'll get a stop watch until you get it right...

P1: Ok-ok, I'll roll, but I at least wanna cut the time in half (P1 increases the penalty for his roll).

P1 gets enough hits to succeed, plus a little extra.

P1: Cool, I wanna use some extra hits to hide my tracks.

Rather than ask for a "stealth" roll, the GM thinks this is fair. the extra hits spent will be used to set of the difficulty for anyone searching the area.

GM: Ok, you wipe the keypad and make sure nothing tips you two off. You're in...
--------------

I guess if I had to compare it to something, I guess it's similar to L5R in that the player can increase the difficulty him/herself for a better outcome, but with the addition of being able to further narrate the task if you get a better margin of success. I'm also looking for magic to be freeform, so knowing how much you have to work with as far as succeeding goes factors a lot into it.

To reply to monsterboy, yeah I'm using the opposite approach; stat offering more chance at succeeding and skill setting the pass/fail bar.

When in doubt, let the players know as much as possible. Letting them predict the consequences of their actions is a good thing. That would mean task resolution 1.

Also, have you heard of/considered using conflict resolution/setting stakes?

Tommi wrote:
When in doubt, let the players know as much as possible. Letting them predict the consequences of their actions is a good thing. That would mean task resolution 1.

Also, have you heard of/considered using conflict resolution/setting stakes?

See Conflict versus task resolution here.

Basically, you determine what success and failure on a given roll will result in, and only after everyone agrees, roll the dice.

I don't necessarily have a problem with the GM rewriting the story off the cuff as they did in the task resolution style example. I could see the GM using both styles during a session. I'm leaning towards Task Res 1 myself and don' see it leaning one way or the other, as it's just a mechanic and Task/Conflict Resolution is a play style. Since I know it's out there though, I will give both examples when I write down the rules. Thanks for that link.

Including both there is a very good idea.