Topic: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
Started by: JW Carroll
Started on: 8/26/2003
Board: Indie Game Design
On 8/26/2003 at 3:00pm, JW Carroll wrote:
Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
Hello all.
Here's the second thread in the ongoing developement of Duellists: Endgame. I started this in response to two posts on the main thread one by MachMoh and the other by Mike Holmes. I want to explain and defend my decision to make Duellists a DRPG and since I think that this is a highly charged subject between designers I feel it should have its own thread...
First off let me say this : I have nothing against dice!! Most of my favorite games use dice and truth be told I enjoy rolling the little buggers quite a bit.
That being said dice are a little overused... Just about every mechanic I can possibly think of has been used ad infinitum. As I'm sure you've all realized as a designer I don't want to just paint the same old house a different color I want something new and exciting. This is not to say that dice games can't be new and exciting but I would like to do something radical. Perhaps I'm getting a little over ambitious here but when one is trying to push the bounds of the industry one can't afford to be timid.
There are problems with DRP. As MacMoh pointed out:
I'm a little worried about how a subjective, diceless system could handle the climactic duels. A lot is at stake, and thats when the players will most feel cheated if they don't win. Even against a stronger duelist. Just my 2-cents, and my general experience with all diceless rpgs. They always seem to go well, until the player starts losing.
DRPGs are not for everybody and whether you like them or not you have to agree that its a matter of taste. Personally I see little difference between diceless and dice based specifically because a player will complain if he loses one way or the other if he is predisposed to do so. I have seen players complain about a dice based game system simply because they didn't perceive that it gave them enough chance to hit. In the specific case of Duellists I don't see how the climactic duel would be better if the player lost because his dice rolled double ones. IMO I think that Amber is probably one of the best systems out there for resolving events of this sort and it is in fact my primary inspiration, game wise, for Duellists.
In my opinion a DRPG will work just fine so long as the right people are playing it with the right GM at the helm. Of course this means that Duellists will not have a great deal of mass market appeal, but then again I'm not trying to build a multi million dollar corporate conglomerate or to sell books at Waldenbooks. To my mind Duellists is like an art film for the gaming industry.
Now that I've made the case for Duellists I'd like to know if any other designers of DRPGs could add some advice. The only one I've actually played is Amber, and I would truly like the thoughts of people who have "been there, done that." Also could someone please provide a link to the Tweet essay on fortuneless mechanics that Mike mentioned?
On 8/26/2003 at 3:33pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
The essay in question is actually in the game Everway. It might be reproduced elsewhere, however, I'm not sure. In any case, it's not about "fortunless" gaming, per se. It discusses the fact that all resolutions in RPGs can be categorized into one of three types, Drama, Fortune or Karma, terms which have been adopted widely here.
Drama refers to making a decision based on what the person with the authority to do so thinks is best for the ongoing action at the time. Note that Drama can be used to create challenge, versimilitude, story, anything. But basically it's the participants whim to some extent.
Fortune means rolling dice or using some other randomizer to determine outcomes.
Karma means comparing things statistically. In Amber, if you have a greater Warfare stat than I do, you win the fight. That's Karma.
Note that the players are encouraged to try to manipulate situations so that the GM will use Drama to choose another Karma comparison. In the case of ties of dice rolls in some games you compare stats "karmically" to determine a winner. This is all to say that most resolution systems are somewhat mixed, actually. Also, there's the concept of pseudo-random, meaning something that seems random to the observer. And other related topics.
Your assertion that the "right" GM and players can make this all work right is a contentious one. Also, I sense that maybe you're under the impression that "diceless" games promote a certain style of play, and that's not completely accepted either. There are some essays here that speak to these ideas that might interest you, including one by Wujcik (see Essays above).
Nobody here is "anti-diceless". To us it's just an option in design. We would never dismiss it out of hand. What we would do, however, is to question your specific application of the idea. Simon's not saying that diceless is bad, just that for the idea of duels, that it might be anti-climactic. Just something to consider.
As far as other "diceless" games, well, there's Everway for example. But that merely uses another sort of Fortune associated with reading cards similar to Tarot cards (in fact games using Tarot and it's interperetation as the primary mechanic abound). The point is that "diceless" means "without dice". As opposed to Fortuneless, which means using Karma or Drama instead. If you use these terms, you'll find that communication of your ideas occur much more effectively.
Another fortuneless game that you may want to look at is Active Exploits at www.pigames.net/.
Mike
On 8/26/2003 at 3:35pm, Simon W wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
Well, you are preaching to the converted in me, because I'm a great fan of Amber, so I may not be able to add much.
Everway uses a diceless mechanic in a not dissimilar way to Amber, so you might want to check this game out.
Pace by Fred Hicks (who also likes Amber, I believe) http://www.evilhat.com/pace/ may also prove of some help.
I agree with you - I've seen so many mechanics for allowing for those occasions when the dice rolls go badly - you know, spend a point to convert failures into success or roll again three times and pick the best result or .... I know, ignore the dice rolls altogether!
Good luck with your game.
Simon
On 8/26/2003 at 8:13pm, DaR wrote:
Re: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
JW Carroll wrote: Now that I've made the case for Duellists I'd like to know if any other designers of DRPGs could add some advice. The only one I've actually played is Amber, and I would truly like the thoughts of people who have "been there, done that."
One thing to remember is that there are a multitude of games which are diceless (and even fortuneless), which often share less in common with each other than many dice games. For example, Theatrix is entirely without dice, yet its system is radically different from Amber, being more or less purely Drama-based compared to Amber, which is essentially pure Karma as written (though often drifted heavily towards Drama in play). Then you have another entirely different class of games represented by Nobilis and the new Marvel Universe RPG, those which rely on resource management.
The basic premise of resource management games is that you have some form of resource (points, stones, pips, tokens, etc) which is limited in number that you can expend to increase your ability to successfully do things.
There are a number of advantages to resource management, in my mind, but the biggest is that there's just as much indeterminability as with dice, but it gives the player much more control over when the results will be indeterminate. You never know exactly how the person on the other side of a conflict will spend their points, or even how many they have, but at the same time, you have to balance how many points you have now versus how many you think you'll need later and how badly you want to succeed now. But if you want to be the badass in this scene, you spend your points, and you are the badass. You'll probably pay for it by getting kicked around later, or by having been kicked around previously, but you're the one in control of that decision.
To look at some examples, namely the two big players in the commercial market, Nobilis and MURPG, and one indie game, Pace, by Fred Hicks:
In Nobilis, all of your primary abilities have a base rating, and then an additional number of miracle points you can use to increase from that base number if necessary. The miracle points are only refreshed when dramatically appropriate, through the game's flaw/handicap system, or between stories. They're precious and you don't use them unless you really need to. Longbeard John, the Baron of Forests, might have an Aspect (which covers miraculous physical actions) at a rating of 2, and have 5 miracle points associated with Aspect. If he needs to perform a level 2 miracle, he simple succeeds. If he needs to perform a level 3 miracle, he must spend one of his 5 Aspect miracle points. That point is now gone, and won't come back until the end of the current story, or until Longbeard John's player manages to work one of his handicaps into the game in a telling way, in which case the GM would award him miracle points.
In MURPG, you have an energy pool, determined by your health and measured in "stones", which refreshes every panel (somewhat equivilent to a round in most games) by some amount, usually 1/3rd of your maximum pool. Performing actions requires that you spend stones out of your energy pool, limited to the number that your stats and skills represent. Spiderman might have an Agility of 4 and a Skill of 5 in Close Combat Fighting, so he can spend up to 9 stones of energy on a single close combat attack. If his Durability were 4, he'd have a maximum of 12 stones in his energy pool. So going for an all out attack would drop his pool from 12 to 3, and in the next panel his pool be refreshed by 4 up to 7. Situational modifiers, good tactics, and various edges or equipment might allow him to add extra stones to each attack, rather than drawing them directly from his energy pool.
In Pace, which is a very lightweight game, your only resource is pips. You've got two rated descriptors which limit how many pips you can spend on a single action. You start with one fee pip towards success if your action is covered by a descriptor and none if its not. You generally start with no pips in your pool to spend but earn them primarily through deliberately failing at various things, earning a pip for each point you failed by, as well as for good roleplay and whatnot. Failures net you a card with the number you failed by and a descriptor appropriate to the failure, which reduces any pips you might spend on applicable actions until the consequences of failure have been played out. You can also choose to deficit spend, and earn "blots" in exchange for spending more than you have. Blots can be used later to make you fail without gaining pips in return.
As you can see, resouce management games can have a number of tweakable "dials" in them. How many different types of resources you have. Whether the points you're spending are your only way to do a thing, or represent effort above and beyond your base level. How fast your points regenerate after spending them, which can range from completely after every action to long periods of time, perhaps even over the course of multiple game sessions. How many points you can have at one time. If points can be earned through in-game play, if so how, and if they can then be saved for later usage. And so on.
In Nobilis, there are multiple types of points which function as extra effort, they regenerate slowly, you typically have relatively few (around 5ish), but if your handicaps and limitations come into play, you can earn more, but such events are fairly rare, maybe once or twice per session at most. In MURPG, there's only really one type of resource points and they're your only effort, they regenerate quite quickly, most people have between 9 and 20, and various pieces of equipment, edges, powers, and smart play can earn you stones in each any every panel. In Pace, you've only got one type of primary resource, which are your effort and which doesn't regenerate on its own, but only through deliberate actions, and of which you generally have a fairly small number.
If this strikes a chord, I'd really recommend going out and picking up a copy of the MURPG. It's fairly cheap, as games go these days, and is a nice and pure example of one way to do a resource management system and the sorts of trade offs you can make. Fred Hick's Pace system is also a good (and free) take on the general resource management idea, that includes several ideas for how to adapt various types of dice mechanics to resource based mechanics in the appendix.
-DaR
On 8/26/2003 at 10:00pm, MachMoth wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
Idea...
I think I might be on to something. No doubt, the characters will have to face several challenges between duels. How about the characters build up karma for how they handle events between duels. Acting in character, and performing goals aligned with the card. Each card can have a list of vague objectives (interpretation is up to the player) that can only be completed once. Completing them builds karma. This can then be used in the duel. Once the character wins, he gets a new card, with new goals to achieve. It would be interesting to see how some players react, when the outcome of the duel rests on them achieving a seemingly evil goal from the devil or death cards. Boo yeah, moral debate.
On 8/27/2003 at 12:07pm, JW Carroll wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
Actually Duellists as written does have a strong resource management system in play between the use of action points and the cards. Especially interesting IMO is that anyone can use their action points to affect an outcome. The idea of some kind of Karma related to fulfilling goals is also a good one especially given the way that the background is developed but I am uncertain at the moment of how to do this since it would have to be mostly related to the greater arcana which I have really not dealt with at all yet.
Hopefully I will be typing up what rules I have down on paper soon. If you would like a copy please drop me a PM.
On 8/28/2003 at 3:12am, MachMoth wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
I'm not sure how familiar you are with tarot cards (obviously somewhat familiar, or you wouldn't be doing this), but here is a website with some basic info on all of the cards:
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/basics/index.html
How familiar am I with tarot cards? Uh, well... I used to play Ogre Battle for the Super Nintendo a lot :D
On 8/28/2003 at 9:18am, Andrew Martin wrote:
RE: Re: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
JW Carroll wrote: That being said dice are a little overused... Just about every mechanic I can possibly think of has been used ad infinitum./quote]
Actually there's plenty more dice mechanics just waiting to be discovered. All one has to do is to make an effort and go looking! :) I've gone looking for them and have found dice systems that no one else in the world has discovered, used or published!
On 8/28/2003 at 1:47pm, JW Carroll wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
You're a better man then I then! Personally I cannot conceive of a dice system that is not some variation of one of the following:
Single die target number system : Roll one die to meet a target number (ie d20.)
Multiple die target number : Same as above but with a variable number of dice (d6 Star Wars)
Multiple die Success system: This is a combination of single and multiple die target number systems, you roll multiple dice but each is compared individually to a target number. This is often used to establish degree of success (The Storyteller games).
Reverse Target Number: These are systems where instead of trying to get higher then a number you arer trying to get less then the number. usually these systems use multiple dice but some use only one( GURPS, All percentile systems).
Table Reference: This one is really archaic and I don't think any of the major companies use it as anything but a sub system, but in this system dice are rolled and compared to a table to determine results (Role Master).
Those are all the dice systems I can think of and all that I've ever seen. Of course I am only including dice here. I think there are plenty of other interesting random systems out there using playing cards, tidly winks, Rock-Paper-Scissors, what have you. I seriously doubt however that anyone will coem up with a dice mechanic that is not in someway a permutation of the above only using different size dice, different means of determining the target number or different modifying factors. I would also love to be proven wrong about this so please try.
On 8/28/2003 at 3:13pm, MachMoth wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
New dice mechanics are rarely better. I've seen more contrived die mechs then any sane human should in a lifetime. And some even got published! I'm not against trying, and it is possible. However, the people looking for that new and better mechanic are usually dorks like us. I've found that the average player wants something with a tried and true base, that they feel comfortable using and teaching to other players. I even know some players that believe a single d20 is the only proper way to handle any skill test. They are, in so many ways (please note personal bias), completely wrong, but that's the kind of players in the market.
On 8/28/2003 at 6:12pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
JW, there are many other common rolling methods that you've apparently not seen. Here are a couple:
Die Pool High Number Opposed: used by a lot of games around here. Roll a pool, and compare the highest rolled die to that of an opposing roll. Ties are handled in different ways for different systems. See Sorcerer, Donjon, and IIRC Prince Valiant?
Die Pool High Number Table Reference: This is used by Jared Sorensen in a lot of his designs. The high die of the pool is compared to a chart, and that determines the effect. Also there are low die versions.
Die Pool Matches and Matched Number: This is the Godlike RPG mechanic. I've also not seen it but I've seen "straights" in die pools mentioned as a potential mechanic, and there have neen lots of "yahtzee" mechanics in the past.
Multiple Die Multiple Read systems: the dice are read once to determine success, and then read again differently to determine the amount of the success. A game I co-wrote called Universalis uses this, the unfinished Isolation system here, and other's I'm sure.
Roll Under Value = Success: Not all percentile dice are simple TN systems with a margin. In Unknown Armies, you roll under a TN, but the actual number rolled is the value of the success (damage).
HeroQuest: I can't even describe it simply, but you do a d20 TN roll-under, with crits and fumble values, and with high roller breaking ties, and then after "bumps" the results are compared on a chart.
Infinite Non-shifting Multi-die Curves vs TN: see the Symetry system in these fora.
Another game here TROS, has a really interesting take on the Multiple Die Success method that you list.
I've seen systems in which results of separate rolls are multiplied to get a result. I've seen some where one die acts as a measure of potential success, but it limited by the roll of another die (and not simply as a "select highest" method).
And this is just off the top of my head. I could go on with some research. With variations on these, your options are near endless. For example, there's all opposed systems to replace the TN systems above. Curves can be altered drastically. Open-endedness, and scalability are factors. Precision. All sorts of things you can toy with.
Mike
On 8/29/2003 at 3:26am, JW Carroll wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
All interesting systems to be sure. Upon consultation on this it seems that perhaps I stated my point about dice too simply and shall have to expound upon it and revise it at more length perhaps as an entry into the theory forum after I've done research into the games you've mentioned and some other independent games, of which I have a woeful lack of knowledge.
In any case I think I can be correct in saying that the number of dice mechanics that have been explored far exceeds the number of diceless mechanics, though some of the discussions of other diceless games on this board has made me think of Duellists as somewhat less ground breaking then when I began work on it. Also I cannot think of any dice system that could be so integrated into what I want to do that Duellists would not better be served as a d20 or GURPS sourcebook. The combination of competition and coorporation of the diceless system I am working on however does seem to fit how the setting is developing.
On 8/29/2003 at 3:44am, MachMoth wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
I think you just made JW's own point, far better than he could. The die thing has been done. It will continue to be done, but the study so far is pretty extensive. I think he would rather not do it at all, instead of doing it poorly.
Though I like to think my own die mechanic creations are just that, my own, everyone of them can be found in some form, some where. I thought when I came up with the Yatzee mech for Six Shooter some four years ago I was a master mind. My Pneuma Engine could be referred to as an inverted Storyteller, crossed with the roll under, higher dice are less effective concept. Every die mechanic I've ever mentioned has been critisized so deeply on elements that don't even matter, that I have taken the stance that you make the roleplaying elements first, and find the best die mechanics to fit the role.
If he says it doesn't need dice (and yes, I'm aware of how hypocritical I'm being here), then I will just have to trust that judgement. He designed the important elements first, and feels the rules don't need dice. I'm inclined to drop my arguement against him, and support his anti-die game. Now if you don't mind, I need a shower!
On 8/29/2003 at 4:21pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: Duellists: Endgame : Diceless Mechanic.
Dice, no dice, matters not. All that matters is that the end product does what it was designed to do. Don't go with one or the other because "they've been done" or "they're trendy" or anything like that. Choose your mechanics based on how well they meet your goals.
JW, if you want to go generic and diceless, look at Active Exploits from PIG. Or at Pace. Either might do it for you.
Mike