Dice Mechanic Thoughts For TTRPGs. I Have Questions.

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 13 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 14

  • @TalesFromElsewhereGames
    @TalesFromElsewhereGames Місяць тому +2

    Might I offer another way to think about dice/resolution systems:
    What matters more than the raw distributions are the opportunities the players have to interact with those distributions. What I mean by this is, it doesn't matter what your success rate is or the exact dice you're using if it is uninteresting for the players to interact with those dice.
    As an example, D&D 5e uses the d20, and the only interaction point you have is took for Advantage on the roll. That's it. Once you have Advantage, you no longer have any interaction points to control the probability of success and failure. In D&D 5e, having a friend help you with something simply gives you Advantage, so there's little reason to coordinate with others.
    DC20 allows you to spend more Action Points to add more d20s, increasing the chances of success significantly. It gives another interaction opportunity by making Advantage stackable.
    What makes D&D 5e and its d20 feel so swingy is the lack of control the players have over that success, which some games like DC20 are attempting to solve.
    So whether or not you're rolling 2d6 or 1d20 or, like in my game, 1d10, what matters more is how much control the players have over that risk versus reward - that they have agency when it comes to their interactions with the dice.
    Solid, concise video! Definitely subscribed 🤠

    • @StagRPG
      @StagRPG  Місяць тому

      Thanks for the note, and I appreciate the vote of confidence!

  • @Mantorp86
    @Mantorp86 Місяць тому +2

    I didn’t like at first systems that have a binary resolution mechanic. Then one day I found a random comment on reddit about “double throwing”. If you throw a dice and you fail you can throw again and if you succeed you get a success with complications. The same tou can do if you succeed the first throw. Like this you get 4 more outcomes than a simple yes/no and the player can choose if he wants to try to beat the odds. For me as a solo player it helped me a lot with those boring “no/failed” checks and it gived them more flavour.

    • @StagRPG
      @StagRPG  Місяць тому

      Solid approach

  • @the-quantum-quill
    @the-quantum-quill Місяць тому +1

    Great topic and I agree it’s an interesting thing to think about!
    A couple of game examples that relate:
    The “Without Number” games by Kevin Crawford lean into this by having two different resolution systems - skills are based on a 2d8 roll (with a bell curve) - for more predictable results. And combat - which is inherently more chaotic (something about getting punched in the face lol) still goes off of a d20 for a wider variance of results.
    If you can stomach its roll under mechanics (haha), Mothership has some really cool ways in how tests are resolved - by themselves they are the success percentage, but players can add their skill values if applicable directly to the test. So if you’re a marine shooting your pulse rifle at a xenomorph, you are going to roll a combat test (35) but you can add your expert firearms training (15) to turn that 35 into a 50 that you now need to roll under. Furthermore rolling doubles on the d100 is a critical whether a success or a failure, which makes things get really interesting in interpreting results. Also, the degree of how much you pass or fail by comes into play for some really good “fail forward” storytelling like if you just barely make it (grabbing the ledge on a jump) or if you completely botch doing the thing (like tripping and plummeting headfirst from a running start).
    For articles to read, if you have not checked them out, Skeleton Code Machine by Exeunt Press is excellent. They cover this exact type of stuff with articles on dice mechanics in ttrpgs and all sorts of cool game design elements + theories of different types of fun etc.

    • @StagRPG
      @StagRPG  Місяць тому +1

      That's one thing I know I hate: different sub games within the game. I want one and only one way to resolve. Roll and be done for everything.

    • @the-quantum-quill
      @the-quantum-quill Місяць тому +1

      @@StagRPG One roll to rule them all, makes sense. I don't mind too much myself.

  • @GolshanIbnys
    @GolshanIbnys Місяць тому +2

    2d6 is really a triangular distribution, while 3d6 is a bell curve.

    • @StagRPG
      @StagRPG  Місяць тому +1

      I called it a stepped pyramid and/or ziggurat in a previous video.

    • @JBGarrison72
      @JBGarrison72 Місяць тому

      True #Golshanbyns, but for those of us not versed in probability mechanics, bell curve is the overall more familiar term I think you would agree.

  • @reactionaryprinciplegaming
    @reactionaryprinciplegaming Місяць тому +1

    Dice mechanics influence the feel of a game. It is more than just the type of dice you roll and the target number you are looking for; there is also how you manipulate the dice (boon/bane, flat bonus, resource to spend, possibility of reroll, etc), how fast the resolution is, and, if you play in person, the feel in the hand (don't have me roll 36 dice, and don't try to get me excited to roll d4s).

    • @StagRPG
      @StagRPG  Місяць тому +1

      d4s really are gross.

    • @JBGarrison72
      @JBGarrison72 Місяць тому

      @reactionarypinciplegaming ...not to mention the aesthetics of various die types.

    • @StagRPG
      @StagRPG  Місяць тому +1

      d12 reigns supreme.