Hello all,

As I am currently stalled out with my other game (waiting to find playtesters) I am working on a new game system with a fairly common design: I want to be able to plug and play different conflict resolution rules and reward systems to create three (or more) different systems within the system in order to be able to encourage all of the creative agendas (on their own, not at the same time). At some point I may experiment with combining techniques and rules to try to encourage play that focuses on "hybrids" but for now it is not the main concern.

To this end I have cooked up a fairly simple dice mechanic to use within conflict resolution and want you guys to weigh in and bounce it off your heads so I can develop it further and make it interesting.

Basically, characters can have (depends on how the system is constructed, sort of like Fudge) Attributes, Skills, Traits, and all kinds of other things. No matter what, each one will have a value, and that value will correspond to how many dice it is worth.

So far, when a conflict is entered, you roll the appropriate attribute dice only (and maybe skill dice, if applicable) As all dice are d6's (something I am toying with changing, for reasons that should soon become clear), the results of each die roll falls between 1 and 6. My dilemma is what to do with these results from here.

One thing I am thinking of is that each result is "spent" in a different way, as such:
Spend a 1: Something happens
Spend a 2: something different and better happens
3: something still different and better happens
4: something still different and better happens
5: still different and better
6: roll one of your traits and add its dice to your available pool of results

This system would not allow you to add results together, so you can't take a four and a two and spend them to roll a trait. It also assumes that when you make an "attack" on your turn, yu can spend as many or as few of the dice as you like and total their result. So, a six becomes valuable because you can either potentially get more dice or have a very nice attack value for a minimum of dice invested. The problem is that I see spending a six to roll a trait to be a better buy all of the time, since as long as you have a 2 or higher in the trait, you will likely beat the six total anyway. One fix I have thought of for this is to say that when defending against an attack, you cannot use more dice than the attacking player used, which makes a six significantly stronger.

The other idea I am toying around with is having a list of options, maybe 4-10 in which you can (and have to for the higher costing options) combine die values and spend them. This way I could make rolling a trait cost 10, also fixing the above problem of sixes being too good for attacking with.

Alternatively, I could operate as I did in the first mechanic, but have values greater than six, so that the only way to access them was to use bigger dice, say a d8 or a d10. I could assign d8's to skills, and d10s to traits and things, leaving statistics at d6. Since the only way to roll a trait might be to sacrifice an 8, which is rare since skills will have lower stat numbers than attributes, it would make it difficult to escalate up. But it might cause the same problem, where sacrificing an 8 doesn't mean much if it lets you roll 2-4 10 sided dice.

So, what do yo guys think? Which dice mechanic seems the most intuitive? Which encourages tactical thinking and which doesn't? What changes would you make to ensure the choice between spending for more rolls and attack values is hard? What other thoughts does it provoke?

Cheers!
--Norm

Moving on from this topic's original intent a little, I have written down a basic idea of where I want things to go. What I would like are suggestions on filling in the option chart. Here's what I wrote for my own brainstorming purposes. I hope you enjoy it and can assist me in creating a great game.

Your character will have attributes. Each attribute will be the solution for one type of conflict. So, for example, One arrangement might be Social, Physical, Non-Lethal Combat, and Lethal Combat. Whenever someone gets into a situation, they determine how they will solve it and roll those dice, all d6s. These initial dice values will generate the character’s ability to respond to the conflict at hand.

What will be present is a chart of possible actions, based on “spending” a die roll. You cannot add up to a total on the chart by using multiple dice, you either have that result or you don’t.

On your turn, you can spend a die, attack, defend, counterattack, or, if able, do two or more based on the last action made.

One of the options that can be purchased is the ability to roll more dice, either through using a different medium to solve the conflict, or by adding in relevant traits or such (potentially traits, relationships, belongings, virtues/vices, anything the game defines or allows. These additional dice are added to your pool of potential results.

If you choose to attack, you spend as many dice as you want and total what you spend. So, spending a 4,2, and 6 would be spending three dice for a total of 12. Play would go to the next player (presumably the one attacked) who can either defend, or take the hit and do something else, or attempt to do more than one thing at once. The three dice you spent act as the threshold, or maximum dice the opponent has to play with. He can use up to three dice to accomplish whatever he wants. In this case, he could trade in three dice for three different things, or attack with as many dice as he wants (the only unlimited action) or defend with up to three dice. Now, if he is able to defend with less than the threshold, he gets to use the leftover dice as he sees fit. Say he spent two 6’s to meet your 12. He has one free die to do whatever he wants. He could counterattack by spending his third die attacking, say a 6. But, because he has spent three dice this turn, you have to meet or beat his 6 with three dice, a very easy feat. Therefore, counterattacking is a bad idea for him as it gives you too much leverage. Instead, he would be better off using his free die to do something else the chart will allow, especially getting more dice, since he spent two high rolls doing it. Note that one cannot attack and defend in the same action unless you adhere to the rules for counterattacking.

If on the other hand he chooses to take the hit, he has the option of doing whatever he wants with those three dice, or attacking with as many as he wishes. But, to take the hit he needs to mark which type of attack he suffered (this is based on the fictional description of the attack, not where the attack came from) and its value and its threshold. These will be important later when he determines his consequences for the conflict.

This system favors the aggressor, because he gets to set the initial value for how many dice are used from that point forward, unless the other player chooses to take the hit and set his own pace. Initially, the threshold is set at 1, so the aggressor can either go for more dice or start an attack and change the conflict threshold.

Another possibility is to have traits and such have different die values, so perhaps traits are d8s, and there is a 7 and 8 option that can only be accessed through trait dice.
Possible Chart Options and associated values:
Another possibility is to generate combinations on the chart, such as 4+6: Something, such that you had to spend two rolls of exact values to achieve a certain result. This would increase the importance of that threshold number. Also, unless the opponent chooses to counterattack, you wouldn’t get to keep that threshold, unless they defended at the threshold or used the other dice for something else.

5: “escalate” by rolling dice for a different type of conflict. Only possible in games that can have multiple means to the same end. Thus, inapplicable in skill or unopposed rolls (such as picking a lock).
6: Use a trait or such.
X: force damage – This would force a player to resolve his consequences early, potentially reducing his capacity to continue the conflict (perhaps this should cost 1+2+3+4+5+6? That would require a six dice threshold! Perhaps this should just be: Win the conflict)