Quote Originally Posted by Tyndmyr View Post
Those definitions are...quite arbitrary, and do not match the usual definitions of the word. You would be better served by saying that some types of randomness are preferable.

Rolling for an attack roll also has randomness.
Okay, I've been spending the last 6 hours thinking of a cohesive response for this post, and still don't have something satisfactory. So I apologize if this seems a bit disorganized.

- I can't know for sure what Yora meant, but I would answer with almost exactly the same words s/he did: Uncertainty is a desirable property that randomness creates, totally independent and separate from it (as it can be created without randomness; see Chess for a great example), but randomness has the potential to create undesirable properties.

- I've struggled to think of a rigorous, formal definition of Uncertainty within the context of game design, so I'll give you a ****ty definition that doesn't work quite right and call it good enough: Uncertainty is the property that the game depends on inputs other than your own moves. Super Mario Bros. is an example of a game without uncertainty: The levels are exactly the same every time, save for Mario's interactions with its objects.

(I'm well aware that this definition falls apart when you try to pin down exactly what the player's "moves" are. Is the exact way you roll a die a move? How about the way your button presses affect the pseudorandom number generator in a video game? Is pissing off another player so they decide to take revenge on your character a move? Where do you draw the line? Just use the intuitive definition: Full Attack is a move, but flipping off the DM is not. And don't think too hard about it.)

- Uncertainty is a desirable property in strategy games because it places a much greater requirement on planning ahead: Because the game could respond to your decision in multiple ways, you have to plan for all of them. Being successful at Tetris, for example, is not just about getting your blocks into position to fill a line, but also requires arranging your pieces so future pieces can also fit in efficiently, balancing future payoff with immediate payoff. Absent risk, planned payoff in the future is always greater, and you need uncertainty to have risk. Without uncertainty about what pieces you're going to be getting, the choice between present and future payoff in Tetris disappears completely.

- As said earlier, uncertainty can be added by any input other than your own determining how the game state advances. This could be the input of an RNG, but uncertainty is also created (perhaps even more effectively) by the decisions of other players. First-person shooters almost implement this perfectly: Bullet spread (normally intended as a way to limit weapon range) and respawn locations usually* being the only RNG dependent factors. The uncertainty in the game is caused by your inaccuracy, your reaction time, and the actions of the other players, the former two being improvable with practice. I'm actually working on a simple proof-of-concept indie thing at the moment that doesn't use dice at all, using only the decisions of other players at the table (including the DM) to determine what happens, while still being a crunch-heavy, (hopefully) deep and interesting strategic combat game.

* Some games don't implement bullet spread and others never have more than a single respawn point on the map at a time. Are there any FPSes with multiple spawn points that always lets you choose where you respawn? There are also other mechanics like critical hits, but these are uncommon in the competitive FPS genre.