The Forge Reference Project

 

Topic: D6 instead of D10?
Started by: quozl
Started on: 12/30/2002
Board: Universalis


On 12/30/2002 at 4:48pm, quozl wrote:
D6 instead of D10?

First, I've read the book but haven't played it yet. I wonder if 6-sided dice can be used instead of 10-siders. If so, what adjustments would need to be made?

I just don't have that many 10-siders laying around....

Message 4699#46724

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by quozl
...in which quozl participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/30/2002




On 12/31/2002 at 12:03am, rafial wrote:
Should work...

Say successes are 1-3, and then have the winner get double coins back. That is, if the winner rolled (1 5 3 4 6 6 2), that would be 3 successes, the sum of the success dice would be 1 + 3 + 2 = 6, so the winner gets 12 coins.

The payoffs under this scheme should be slightly higher than if you were using d10s, but not badly so... Or you might try paying off winners according to the schedule:

d6 result
1 = 1 coin
2 = 3 coins
3 = 5 coins

Which should be pretty spot on. Under this scheme the winner in the example above would get 9 coins.

Message 4699#46756

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by rafial
...in which rafial participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2002




On 12/31/2002 at 2:53am, quozl wrote:
Re: Should work...

rafial wrote: Or you might try paying off winners according to the schedule:

d6 result
1 = 1 coin
2 = 3 coins
3 = 5 coins


Hmm...maybe we could just say odd numbers are successes, then all you would get are 1's, 3's and 5's. Would that work?

Message 4699#46763

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by quozl
...in which quozl participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2002




On 12/31/2002 at 3:49am, rafial wrote:
RE: Re: Should work...

quozl wrote: Hmm...maybe we could just say odd numbers are successes, then all you would get are 1's, 3's and 5's. Would that work?


Yes indeed, the simple elegance of that approach is astounding.

Message 4699#46768

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by rafial
...in which rafial participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2002




On 12/31/2002 at 9:33pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: D6 instead of D10?

Nifty. This should go right up next to the add-on about using Coins. Excellent work.

Mike

Message 4699#46821

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Mike Holmes
...in which Mike Holmes participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2002




On 1/1/2003 at 2:32pm, Paganini wrote:
RE: D6 instead of D10?

Mike Holmes wrote: Nifty. This should go right up next to the add-on about using Coins. Excellent work.


I'm lost... was that sarcasm, Mike, or did I miss something?

If it's not sarcasm, why didn't you already know about it? It's what you do in Synthesis, and it's basically what we were doing in the IRC games.

Message 4699#46839

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Paganini
...in which Paganini participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/1/2003




On 1/1/2003 at 5:07pm, Bob McNamee wrote:
RE: D6 instead of D10?

Nathan,

I think the main point is that by using this method with d6's it keeps both the chance of success, and the range of Coin gain per success that using d10's do.

As a Champions GM with way more d6's than d10's I may end up switching to this method myself. If I find Complication die amounts going up too high.

Message 4699#46846

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Bob McNamee
...in which Bob McNamee participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/1/2003




On 1/3/2003 at 2:21am, Valamir wrote:
RE: Re: Should work...

rafial wrote:
quozl wrote: Hmm...maybe we could just say odd numbers are successes, then all you would get are 1's, 3's and 5's. Would that work?


Yes indeed, the simple elegance of that approach is astounding.


I agree. This will definitely go up with the next update.

Message 4699#46929

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Valamir
...in which Valamir participated
...in Universalis
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/3/2003