Topic: Struggling for a balance
Started by: preludetotheend
Started on: 9/15/2007
Board: First Thoughts
On 9/15/2007 at 1:33pm, preludetotheend wrote:
Struggling for a balance
As I am pushing onward with my game I have the concept and such all completely sketched out I am just very stuck on of the more key things…resolution. I know I want a dice pool method with the max number of dice being rolled equal to the number of descriptors used in the players presentation of their action. Unlike wushu traits serve the function of representing the max number of dice rolled instead of the actual amount rolled.
Right now I am working with conflict resolution highest pool wins. For ease of adding reasons only evens are counted towards the end result.
Two problems I am having:
1. I want to include a damage track but have not yet settled on a system for determining the number of damage taken or the way it is tracked. (In this regard while, I am still pondering the actual method I want to use I would appreciate any thoughts on good simple methods)
2. Since dice pools are decided completely on the amount of dramatic flare added to the action characters who just hang back and shoot as support will have a great deal of difficulty in overcoming small ineffective dice pools, and I was wondering how some might overcome this?
Any way I have to cut this post shorter than I want but for now this is the basics of what I need. I will swing by to update more on the game beyond this with another post probably but I would like to mostly focus on the above two issues here.
Regards, Seth
On 9/15/2007 at 5:47pm, Ken wrote:
Re: Struggling for a balance
Seth wrote:
I know I want a dice pool method with the max number of dice being rolled equal to the number of descriptors used in the players presentation of their action.
Since dice pools are decided completely on the amount of dramatic flare added to the action characters who just hang back and shoot as support will have a great deal of difficulty in overcoming small ineffective dice pools, and I was wondering how some might overcome this?
One way around this is you base all die pools on the same basic formula (natural ability + skill; or whatever); this is the number of dice that you count when determining task resolution. Then you add a bonus die for each descriptor used, but it only modifies the dice thrown, not the number of dice counted; you just count the best dice. So, for instance, you've got a guy who sits back and shoots his gun and has a 3d6 pool (or whatever), so his average is 11 (and a half, really). Then you have the a guy with equal skill and characteristics who dramatically whips out his guns (1), leaps through the air towards his target (2), and lets out a dramatic yell as he is flying through the air guns blazing (3); he gets his pool of 3d6, plus 3d6 for a total of 6d6, but only counts the best 3 dice (average of 14). This way, everyone looks the same on paper, but those who more colorfully narrate their actions get a slight curve in their die results.
I hope that helps. Would like to hear more about the game setting that wraps around this system.
Take care,
Ken
On 9/15/2007 at 6:02pm, Ken wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
Seth wrote:
I want to include a damage track but have not yet settled on a system for determining the number of damage taken or the way it is tracked. (In this regard while, I am still pondering the actual method I want to use I would appreciate any thoughts on good simple methods)
Most damage track systems that I've come across seem to have a few tiers, each one representing a stage of injury (which would probably work good with your focus on narration). A good starting point would be to figure out how damage is inflicted and the kinds of numbers you're throwing around; then its just a matter of calibrating the damage from weak, medium, and strong attacks so that (on average) they have the appropriate effect on the (average) character's health track. For instance, a normal punch shouldn't kill ordinarily, while a knife could kill, and a gunshot would almost always be lethal.
As far as suggestions on how to do it; simple is good. A track with four boxes could do: bruised, hurt, injured, and wounded (dead would be the next level, but probably doesn't need a box). Another common damage track feature seems to be task penalties associated with being on a certain level of injury (I use something like this for Ten-Cent Heroes); this further adds to the drama of being hurt.
That is about as helpful as I can get without having more specific mechanical data. I'm a number cruncher; when working on my game, I spent days running theoreticals to calibrate various systems, including my damage track. Hope this helps.
Take Care,
Ken
On 9/15/2007 at 8:31pm, VoidDragon wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
Actually, it looks like Seth is going more for the "success is based on descriptive elements" than "success is based on stats". If I understand correctly, each facet describing the character counts as a die, but that die cannot be used unless it's called upon in a flashy description of the action? Either that, or you have a Trait representing the full dice pool, which they can pull from when describing their action? Since the definition of "trait" is a fuzzy one, I can't be sure just by reading your post.
That said, I've looked at the basics of the Wushu system online, and I think they're pretty cool.
Math correction (again, if I understand Seth correctly): If Seth is using d6s, then each d6 has an average result of 2. Since he's only counting evens, the potential results are 0, 0, 0, 2, 4, 6. The average of these is 2. For d8s, it would be 2.5; for d10s, it would be 3; and for d12s it would be 3.5.
I understand the writers block that comes with trying to think of a unique flashy description of an action every time. I thought of few ways you could go with this:
1. Ranged attacks are just like Melee attacks, except they have the extra bonus that they can be done at range. Therefore, they should have some drawback in-game, and that drawback is that actions are harder to make interesting, and therefore less accurate.
2. Ranged attacks include all kinds of maneuvers, like ducking into grass or behind a tree. You could go into detail about how the character simply let the opponent come into position and released the arrow when the time was right. Be more lenient, and more wuxia with ranged attacks than you're willing to do with melee.
3. Make it so that the ranged attackers are primarily magicians. Describing the flow of essence surging around one's body in various different themes depending on the spell is really cool.
As far as the damage track, what does damage mean in your game? I.E., if someone is hit, what really happens? Does that character keep fighting at full power with the wound? Does that character take a specific disadvantage based on the description of the attack? Or does the wounded take general damage, which slows him or her down a bit until some healing can be done? I'm sure you could even think of an option more creative than these.
-Jason Timmerman
On 9/15/2007 at 9:59pm, Ken wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
Hey-
Y'know, I thought that I read that only evens counted towards resolution, but when I went back to confirm it, I totally missed it- sorry. So, my number crunching was off, but the sentiment is still good; if everyone starts with base dice and then adds dice for describing their actions then (theoretically) every other die is going to generate a usable result. Just keep all of the evens. That may still be a useful mechanic.
VoidDragon wrote:
Actually, it looks like Seth is going more for the "success is based on descriptive elements" than "success is based on stats".
I get that, and think that is a worthy mechanic, (and Jason, I'm not calling you out here) but Seth seemed worried about there being a bit of inequity between those who put a lot of effort into describing the actions of their characters and those who don't. I've been in games with the talented narrator and the mono-syllabic grunter (at the same table), and know this these groups exist; there could be a genuine rift in the enjoyment factor between the two extremes. A descriptors = dice system is definitely slanted towards the guy who talks the most.
There is another issue here too, and that is playing the system but not the game. As designers, we have to come to grips with the fact that these games have to work, when we aren't running them. In a game like this, you potentially invite people to blab and blab and blab (and blab) just to hopefully get an extra die for the roll. At some point, someone is just trying to get more dice, not really advance gameplay. When one player sees another get a ton of dice by reciting a sonnet about their character's action, you may quickly find yourself in an arms race of descriptive prose (but for no good reason). I'm sure that we've all seen rules mechanic abuse in various games, and it can really strip the fun out of an otherwise enjoyable game.
To me, there are two options: 1) level the playing field, so that those with average abilities and average skill can accomplish average tasks, or 2) do nothing, let those who can't put color in their action descriptions fail a lot, and hope they learn their lesson. (I don't really have a problem with that. Games choose their players as much as players choosing a game; if a player doesn't like narrating their character's actions in great detail, a game with this system wouldn't be for them.)
Enough preaching for now. Still like to hear more about your setting and story concept.
Take care,
Ken
On 9/16/2007 at 3:13pm, Chris_Chinn wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
Hi Seth,
I think your two problems are not unrelated.
See, the dice pool depends on something HIGHLY variable, while a damage track depends on a predictable scale.
Nearly every game that uses a damage track has some scale of minimum, average and maximum damage, and can base the damage track on that. When one group might use 3 descriptors in combat and another might use 8, it's hard to base a scale on that.
Are there any mechanical limits to the number of descriptions someone might pull out? Or is it relying on group consensus to draw the line?
Chris
On 9/17/2007 at 10:02am, Ken wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
Hi-
Something occurred to me about your game. I know what I think of when you say descriptors, but what do you have in mind? Could you give an example?
Most games penalize characters for shoving to many steps in their actions. Just curious, thanks.
Take care,
Ken
On 9/17/2007 at 2:31pm, Valamir wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
Seth I'd be interested in knowing how your system actually works prior to the issues you have above.
Wushu is a terribly broken system, but it sounds like you've made some changes to it that might (or might not) help with that.
On 9/25/2007 at 8:34pm, Creatures of Destiny wrote:
RE: Re: Struggling for a balance
I'm not familiar with the Wushu system, but as for damage track with dice pools, how about using dice themselves?
I mean say you have an attack dice pool of 5, and you take damage, you have to hand over 3 dice, so now you're down to two.
This wouldn't just reflect damage but also situational problems (such as being pushed back, knocked down or whatever), so you should get the chance to recover. Maybe you could have it so when all your dice rolls are equal, say on 3d6 you roll three 4s, then you recover, that way as you get closer to your last dice it does get easier to recover.
Of course that makes it even worse for non - players. One way round descriptive players, one way round that would be to have the limit of bonus dice equal to yuou current base pool. So a 3d6 character with a 3d6 bonus (for a total of 6d6) loses two dice. THe new base dice is 1d6, s the bonus is only 1d6 (for a total of 2d6). Also the bonus dice may only count for rolls and not damage.
Dan