Planning an Original System. Need help

[Ralcos]

As the title says, I'm planning an original system of my own that focuses more on storytelling, and I need an opinion on my ideas.


No Ability Scores; Characters are measured in two sets. Attributes and Skills.

Attributes = List of things you can attribute to the character (Agility, Strength, Vitality, Willpower, Intellect, Perception, Charisma, etc.) Can also include Race and Profession as separate Attributes.

Skills = What your character is skilled at.

For each Attribute or Skill that applies to the task, you add a +1 bonus to your total roll.


BASIC ROLL: Roll 2d10. Your result is the highest number minus the lowest number.
E.G. Ian just rolled a 10 and a 5. 10 minus 5 is equal to 5. THEN, he applies any bonuses from his Attributes and Skills.


Basically, I'm still planning the basic mechanics, but I'm thinking this is a cool starting point to what I have.

[JNAProductions]

No ability scores! But attributes.

Not too dissimilar concepts.

Overall, though, that core mechanic seems neat, if a bit slow.

[Ralcos]

No ability scores! But attributes.

Not too dissimilar concepts.

Overall, though, that core mechanic seems neat, if a bit slow.

Well, I didn't word it right. Your attributes aren't measured in numbers. You're considered to be Strong if you have the Strength attribute. That sort of thing.

[JNAProductions]

I do get that, I just find it a touch funny that you used near-synonyms.

Overall, though, why 2d10 (highest minus lowest)? You get a weird distribution.

0	10%
1	18%
2	16%
3	14%
4	12%
5	10%
6	8%
7	6%
8	4%
9	2%

Do you want to err to the low end?

[Ralcos]

I do get that, I just find it a touch funny that you used near-synonyms.

Overall, though, why 2d10 (highest minus lowest)? You get a weird distribution.

0	10%
1	18%
2	16%
3	14%
4	12%
5	10%
6	8%
7	6%
8	4%
9	2%

Do you want to err to the low end?

Honestly, I like working with low numbers.

Plus I was wondering why 2d10 high minus lowest wasn't done.
It seemed like an interesting idea to base a game around.

Does the idea pose problems I'm not seeing?

[JeenLeen]

Mechanically, seems like a decent system, as long as you build what a success is based on the probability distribution.
From a player-perspective, though, having to do subtraction with every roll would make me dislike this system. Also, there's a certain emotional feeling about rolling a high result on a die; that rolling high is not necessarily good (e.g., a 9 is good but not if you already rolled a 10), that might upset some sentiments, if only subconsciously.

Would Skills also be a flat +1 or not, or could you have up to +X (e.g., something like 1-3 for novice, skilled, and master ranks.)?

[UrielAwakened]

Honestly if you're looking for something with a narrative focus, that's a lot of math to be doing for any decision point.

Have you tried looking at how Dungeon World or Fate handles things?

[Ralcos]

Honestly if you're looking for something with a narrative focus, that's a lot of math to be doing for any decision point.

Have you tried looking at how Dungeon World or Fate handles things?

I like how Fate handles it, and I was taking inspiration from it.
How does Dungeon World do it?

[Ralcos]

Mechanically, seems like a decent system, as long as you build what a success is based on the probability distribution.
From a player-perspective, though, having to do subtraction with every roll would make me dislike this system. Also, there's a certain emotional feeling about rolling a high result on a die; that rolling high is not necessarily good (e.g., a 9 is good but not if you already rolled a 10), that might upset some sentiments, if only subconsciously.

Would Skills also be a flat +1 or not, or could you have up to +X (e.g., something like 1-3 for novice, skilled, and master ranks.)?

I was thinking of having up to 3 ranks for skills.
And I know what you mean about the rolling high on both dice but realizing that isn't as good.

[UrielAwakened]

I like how Fate handles it, and I was taking inspiration from it.
How does Dungeon World do it?

You have some modifiers to I think 6 abilities.

Roll 2d6 and add your modifier, if you're a 10 or higher you pass, if it's a 7 to 9 you pass with consequences. Consequences depend on which ability score you use and players get to choose what those consequences are as well. For instance, if you use Dex to shoot, the consequence can be you run out of ammo, or now you're in a bad position for return fire, etc..

No math or need to compare to anything beyond a known-value. Super fast.

[Ralcos]

You have some modifiers to I think 6 abilities.

Roll 2d6 and add your modifier, if you're a 10 or higher you pass, if it's a 7 to 9 you pass with consequences. Consequences depend on which ability score you use and players get to choose what those consequences are as well. For instance, if you use Dex to shoot, the consequence can be you run out of ammo, or now you're in a bad position for return fire, etc..

No math or need to compare to anything beyond a known-value. Super fast.

That's actually pretty nice.
Should I redo my base roll to be like that?
2d10 plus modifiers from attributes and skills, to reach 10 or higher?

[UrielAwakened]

That's actually pretty nice.
Should I redo my base roll to be like that?
2d10 plus modifiers from attributes and skills, to reach 10 or higher?

Generally speaking it would be faster yeah.

[Ralcos]

So, the average of 2d10 is 10.5 yes?

How about I keep Attributes and Skills the same in terms of mechanics (Can be Novice (+1), Expert (+2), or Masters (+3)).

Then it's a 2d10 roll, using the appropriate attributes or skills to apply to the check, and try to beat a DC based on the difficulty.

Easy Tasks, you have to roll a total of 8 or above.

Average Tasks, you have to roll a total of 10 or above.

Hard Tasks, you have to roll a total of 12 or above.


This a better plan than before?

[JNAProductions]

11, actually.

[Ralcos]

11, actually.

Hmm... Then maybe 10 is too generous of a DC. lol

Easy Tasks require you to have a total of 10 or higher to succeed.

Average Tasks require you yo have a total of 12 or higher to succeed.

Hard Tasks require you to have a total of 14 or higher to succeed.

[MoleMage]

I like the original dice mechanic actually.

However, to mitigate the 0 result, you should allow doubles to either count as a hard result (like a crit), or allow doubles to count as the number they actually are (10/10 is 10, not 0). This splits the 10% across all other possible results (1-9 each gain 1%, and characters gain a 1% chance of getting a 10).

Also, certain character special abilities could grant additional conditional d10s, with the character using whichever pair is best for them.

[Ralcos]

I like the original dice mechanic actually.

However, to mitigate the 0 result, you should allow doubles to either count as a hard result (like a crit), or allow doubles to count as the number they actually are (10/10 is 10, not 0). This splits the 10% across all other possible results (1-9 each gain 1%, and characters gain a 1% chance of getting a 10).

Also, certain character special abilities could grant additional conditional d10s, with the character using whichever pair is best for them.

That's actually a pretty damn Awesome idea.
I love it.

[UrielAwakened]

It's just weirdly complicated. Humans are worse at subtraction than addition and mathematically 2d10 with a base DC of 10 is no different than 1d10-1d10 with a base DC of 0.

You're complicating it for the sake of being different which isn't good game design IMO.

[MoleMage]

It's just weirdly complicated. Humans are worse at subtraction than addition and mathematically 2d10 with a base DC of 10 is no different than 1d10-1d10 with a base DC of 0.

You're complicating it for the sake of being different which isn't good game design IMO.

Mathmatical Distrubtion of those two calculations is not the same.





Large d10 minus small d10 produces a steeper curve situated more heavily at the low end (1), 2d10 is equally likely to be greater than or less than 11, leading to more variance. Also, if you are adding constants to either result, the impact of a constant changes if the possible values are 1 to 10 compared to 2 to 20 (+1 to the 0 to 9 has greater impact).


Your concerns about subtraction at the table are valid though. Personally I've never found it to be an issue when dealing with small numbers (penalties for example have never tripped up or frustrated my DnD players), but I also play primarily with various kinds of engineers so my experiences probably are somewhat inaccurate to the norm.

EDIT: Bad image URLs

[Ralcos]

Mathmatical Distrubtion of those two calculations is not the same.





Large d10 minus small d10 produces a steeper curve situated more heavily at the low end (1), 2d10 is equally likely to be greater than or less than 11, leading to more variance. Also, if you are adding constants to either result, the impact of a constant changes if the possible values are 1 to 10 compared to 2 to 20 (+1 to the 0 to 9 has greater impact).


Your concerns about subtraction at the table are valid though. Personally I've never found it to be an issue when dealing with small numbers (penalties for example have never tripped up or frustrated my DnD players), but I also play primarily with various kinds of engineers so my experiences probably are somewhat inaccurate to the norm.

EDIT: Bad image URLs

This is proving incredibly helpful for my ideas.

I'm aiming to keep the static DCs though, even if I go High Minus Low.

Maybe just making those DCs reflect the numbers on these tables would help A LOT for balancing gameplay.

[Ralcos]

I think an example is needed here.

Let's say I keep the Hi minus Low mechanic:

E.G.
James wants to hack a computer, and I as GM, give it a medium DC (6).

He rolls a 5 and a 2, and applies his "Intellect" Attribute, and his "Computers" Skill to this test. He's an Expert in both Computers and Intellect (+2 from each).

5 - 2 = 3
3 + 4 = 7

He succeeds with flying colors, hacking the computer!


Now, if we do the 2d10 total idea...

An Average Difficulty is 12.

5 + 2 = 7
7 + 4 = 11

Normally, he'd fail, or pass with mild consequences.



NOTE: This is me typing up my thoughts, so it's not too coherent.
I'm just wanting to show what I want to do in action.

[Knaight]

Honestly, I like working with low numbers.

Plus I was wondering why 2d10 high minus lowest wasn't done.
It seemed like an interesting idea to base a game around.

Does the idea pose problems I'm not seeing?

The mechanic has been (approximately) used before and worked - Qin: The Warring States uses it with the only difference being that doubles count as the number on the dice instead of zero.

The part that I'd be more worried about working properly is the bonus by accretion - having lots of different bonuses in effect is often a source of bloat and slowdown, and the system seems practically built around that.

It's just weirdly complicated. Humans are worse at subtraction than addition and mathematically 2d10 with a base DC of 10 is no different than 1d10-1d10 with a base DC of 0.

Putting aside for the moment how zero centered distributions can be nicer to work with for a number of reasons (consistently doing one digit operations instead of two digit operations comes to mind, as does the obvious symmetry in terms of how much better or how much worse than average one does) the system proposed isn't 1d10-1d10. It's the absolute value of 1d10-1d10.

[Ralcos]

The mechanic has been (approximately) used before and worked - Qin: The Warring States uses it with the only difference being that doubles count as the number on the dice instead of zero.

The part that I'd be more worried about working properly is the bonus by accretion - having lots of different bonuses in effect is often a source of bloat and slowdown, and the system seems practically built around that.


Putting aside for the moment how zero centered distributions can be nicer to work with for a number of reasons (consistently doing one digit operations instead of two digit operations comes to mind, as does the obvious symmetry in terms of how much better or how much worse than average one does) the system proposed isn't 1d10-1d10. It's the absolute value of 1d10-1d10.

So, how should I make my idea work better.
What would be better than granting bonuses on what the character is good at?

[Knaight]

So, how should I make my idea work better.
What would be better than granting bonuses on what the character is good at?

As long as the list doesn't get too long this would be fine - a list of 40 skills which routinely has 4-8 useful on an individual roll just gets unwieldy. There's a reason just rolling one skill is pretty conventional.

[Ralcos]

As long as the list doesn't get too long this would be fine - a list of 40 skills which routinely has 4-8 useful on an individual roll just gets unwieldy. There's a reason just rolling one skill is pretty conventional.

What I was thinking for that.

Attributes are "descriptors" or "Major Abilities".

E.g. Strength, Vitality, Intellect, Magic, Race (Can only be chosen at Level 1)/Classes.


Skills are "Actions" or "Minor Abilities".

E.g. Weapon skills, Athletics, Lore, Endurance, Craft, Profession, ETC.

Each Attribute or Skill can be Novice (+1), Expert (+2), or Master (+3), trained from Level 1.
I'll probably have limited sets for when I actually build out the game on paper.

Honestly, I think I'm going too broad in this idea, but I'm only thinking that characters/creatures would only have up to six Attributes and up to six Skills.

[MoleMage]

You could split things into categories, and say that only one thing from each category applies. Say you have two Attributes: Expert Elf and Novice Dexterity. You need to cross a tightrope. You can use one or the other, but not both. If you have an appropriate skill (like acrobatics), you can also use it, but not more than two. Or one skill and one talent. But put a hard limit on the number of modifiers to any single roll and you can control the unwieldy nature of adding a bunch of small modifiers to a roll.

[Ralcos]

You could split things into categories, and say that only one thing from each category applies. Say you have two Attributes: Expert Elf and Novice Dexterity. You need to cross a tightrope. You can use one or the other, but not both. If you have an appropriate skill (like acrobatics), you can also use it, but not more than two. Or one skill and one talent. But put a hard limit on the number of modifiers to any single roll and you can control the unwieldy nature of adding a bunch of small modifiers to a roll.

A great idea!

Probably will keep it to one Attribute and one Skill related to the challenge at hand.

Will need to put descriptions to which Attributes/Skills do what.

[lt_murgen]

I've been playing games for the better part of 4 decades, and I just want to throw this out there:

TSR Marvel Superheroes had the simplist, most narrative style of problem resolution- the chart. You could easily do the same with a simplified 0-10 chart. Put all the bonuses into picking the column, and remove the math. Colors give narrative explanations of act.

Spoiler: the chart

Show

[Ralcos]

I've been playing games for the better part of 4 decades, and I just want to throw this out there:

TSR Marvel Superheroes had the simplist, most narrative style of problem resolution- the chart. You could easily do the same with a simplified 0-10 chart. Put all the bonuses into picking the column, and remove the math. Colors give narrative explanations of act.

Spoiler: the chart

Show

Ooh! This might help a lot for helping build and balance gameplay. I LOVE IT!
I'll build a chart for a High Minus Low system. :D

[Ralcos]

Made a chart! Is the idea fine?
I was thinking of doing it in a manner akin to other games that give effects based on how successful the roll is.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing