[Type of rolls] Choose which you prefer

[Waargh!]

We are currently making an RPG game and we are discussing, thoroughly, which of the following options should we use for the random factor of the game. We would really like your opinion about the matter.

1) A single die system. Maybe not d20, but d12 or d100. You add your modifiers and try to pass a number (a DC)
Examples: d20 system

2) Use 3d6 system. Like above you add modifiers and try to pass a number (a DC). The difference is that you have more possibilities getting the average numbers, like a 10 or 11 and less the "extreme" numbers, like 15 or 5.
Examples: GURPS

3) Use a multiple success system. You will roll an amount of d6 and count the 5s and 6s. Those are your successes. Successes are "how good" your check was. You don't just pass or fail a check, you have a degree of success. Failure is 0 successes. The better you get for a given action the more d6 you get to roll for it (instead of applying a bonus on the roll, like a +5, +2)

So, for example, you might roll a 5d6 attack. If you get 3 5s and/or 6s you have 3 successes and you might deal 3 damage. If you had 2 you might have dealt 2 damage.

Examples: World of Darkness, New World of Darkness, Shadowrun

(Hope they make sense. If not I can explain better)


So which one sounds more appealing to you? Which one sound more interesting? What are your thoughts?

Personally, I would also want you to answer this question:
Is rolling a lot of d6 (lets say 8d6) per attack and counting 5s and 6s too much trouble? Lets say you have 3-4 attacks per turn.

[The Rose Dragon]

I prefer whatever system you come up with use d10s. Because most of my favorite systems do that (WoD, Unisystem, Qin: The Warring States, to name a few).

[Lysander]

I think 3d6 is great for games where you don't want your characters to die very often. d20 is fun for epic battles where you want every roll to be fraught with tension. Multiple success could be annoying if you keep rolling every but a 5 and 6.

How about having two types of dice rolls.

3d6 for actions your characters are practiced it. Like profession rolls or core class abilities. Your characters are likely to succeed but unlikely to do better than they usually do.

d20 could be for riskier actions that could potentially go terribly or superbly depending on chance. For example, a non-acrobat swinging across a chasm on a rope.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

I prefer whatever system you come up with use d10s. Because most of my favorite systems do that (WoD, Unisystem, Qin: The Warring States, to name a few).

The only problem with d10s is that, in a dice pool, you have to take up a few precious seconds figuring out whether or not everything is a 9 or a 6, as few dice really differentiate the two (why some enterprising WoD gaming company hasn't released dice with the 8, 9, and 10 colored differently I'll never know). A pool of d6s, d8s, or d12s doesn't have this problem, meaning that you can calculate the results faster, which is important when making "3-4 attacks per turn."

That said, a dice pool is still probably faster than a 3d6+modifier, as, if successes are easy to find, a simple tally is faster than addition most of the time (although from character generation in D&D many gamers can add 3d6 in a millisecond...).

[Weimann]

I like the multiple success idea, or failing that, 3d6.

The first one is partly just the gratification of rolling an obscene amount of dice (but, of course, also the annoyance when they fall off the table), but also that this system works with the lowest numbers of the ones suggested. Lower numbers mean that every number counts more, which appeals to me. A character with 4 dice, compared to a character with 2 dice, is twice as good at something. A character with a +2 skill check in a d20 system is only marginally better than a character with +4 skill check, because of that huge number on the die.

The second one because I find it gives more stability than a single die system. Less extremities is good, I think; it makes a game reliable, which makes it easier to make awesome, since you can moderate power levels and such through the design of the powers and not have to take such a broad spectrum of chance into account.


Is rolling a lot of d6 (lets say 8d6) per attack and counting 5s and 6s too much trouble? Lets say you have 3-4 attacks per turn.I don't think it is. You can spot at a glance what you got, usually at least, and it only takes a second to sort it out if you can't. It's a physical job, rooting in the dice, so I don't think it'd be boring. Also, working low numbers is easier than high numbers as stated above, and so, modifers can be applied easier.

The only problem might be that to roll efficiently, you'd need a crapload of dice, which everyone might not have.

[Glimbur]

I like lots of dice, count successes because it allows expoding dice, which I find to be a fun mechanic. It makes most anything hypothetically possible, but unlikely. A d20 has about 1/20 odds of letting you succeed if there is an auto-success system. Exploding dice have a generally smaller chance of you getting the 20+ successes you need to run up the Demon Lord's sword as he swings it at you... but it's possible.

tl;dr Multiple successes because of exploding dice.

[Siosilvar]

Personally, I would also want you to answer this question:
Is rolling a lot of d6 (lets say 8d6) per attack and counting 5s and 6s too much trouble? Lets say you have 3-4 attacks per turn.

Yes. Rolling lots of d6s is fun, but not every time your turn rolls around.

If you could get specially marked dice with four blanks sides, it'd be okay.


As for the rest of the question:
I know it's not listed, but I'd really like to see a base mechanic using d12s. Specifically, 2d12. Give them some love.

[Vadin]

If you could get specially marked dice with four blanks sides, it'd be okay.

Most normal dice take Expo markers remarkably well (you do have to let it sit for a minute or so), and it's usually only a simple matter of a wet paper towel to clean them off.