Perhaps showing a graph with the distribution of the results might help with multi-dice systems. But if you have to show graphs so that players have an idea of the expected result...
-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
If RPGs Had Evolved Over The Past 20 Years...
- Thread starter Chippy
- Start date
Perhaps showing a graph with the distribution of the results might help with multi-dice systems. But if you have to show graphs so that players have an idea of the expected result...
Ayreos
Augur
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2015
- Messages
- 109
But RPGs have evolved.
Vestigial features that drag down the whole design? Check.
Ludicrous forms when examined rationally, yet perfectly adapted to the environment (audience) they survive in? Check.
Made just to die and be forgotten by design for the sake of a new, better adapted generation? Check.
In-built flaws to prevent them from reaching their potential just so the new ones can repeat the same mistakes again without being completely blown out of the water? Check!
Early ones generally ridiculed as "ancient" when by all accounts superior? Check!!
Vestigial features that drag down the whole design? Check.
Ludicrous forms when examined rationally, yet perfectly adapted to the environment (audience) they survive in? Check.
Made just to die and be forgotten by design for the sake of a new, better adapted generation? Check.
In-built flaws to prevent them from reaching their potential just so the new ones can repeat the same mistakes again without being completely blown out of the water? Check!
Early ones generally ridiculed as "ancient" when by all accounts superior? Check!!
Ol' Willy
Arcane
If one doesn't know about normal distribution, this one has no business playing games with complex mechanics. Stop catering to retards!
Last edited:
Items shouldn't have variables, but constants. A sword is as effective as it is utilized. Size and quality are factors of course, but they are constant. Rolling dice would primarily be concerned with character ability & skill. Consider two swordsmen, an "Ordinary Master" (3d8) vs a "Exceptional Journeyman" (2d10), both with the same weapon (+2).
The ordinary master has an 87.5% chance to get at least a 7, whereas the exceptional journeyman has only an 84% chance to get at least a 7. Experience/practice wins over ability for common tasks. Now when we get to rolling an 8, we start reaching the limits of practice, where as the ordinary master has a 75.59% chance and the exceptional journeyman has a 75% chance to roll and 8. This is where ability & experience intersect. Above 8 though, our ordinary master is outside the limits of their natural ability and has only a 33% chance to score a 10, while our exceptional journey man can unreliably score an 11 at 36%. Checkout this link. Use the Graph and At Least functions.
It makes for alot of interesting match-ups and controls bloat in the best way possible. There are also many ways to manipulate these dice for all sorts of conditions. People don't need to know precise probabilities. They can easily understand the relationship between larger dice giving a higher value, and more dice giving reliability. D&D 5E with advantage/disadvantage has demonstrated this. Even if explicit outcomes odds were needed, computers handle this easily.
luj1
You're all shills
Thats why they suck so much now
TemplarGR
Dumbfuck!
The reason rpgs suck so much now is because most people have given up on developing something even approaching the genius of masterpieces like Skyrim and Fallout 4, so they keep making clones of 25 year old rpgs instead.
luj1
You're all shills
for good reason
I wrote recently in another thread that I wished in games like New Vegas that melee weapons could have a massive stealth bonus along with a massive direct attack against ranged characters penalty. This would make them more situational and logical for a stealthy spy style PC, and encourage roleplaying choices about what to improve and when. You could apply that to a tanky two-handed warrior having a super hard time hitting agile rogues, and some of the more tactical RPGs do just that. In Skyrim for example, you could have it be basically impossible to hit an agile enemy with a maul unless you stun them with a shout first.
Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,655
¿Y por qué no los dos?
Companions wouldn't be a problem if you could control their actions instead of letting an AI do the work for you. I REALLY liked how Wasteland 2 did it: depending on your stats, companions were less likely to disobey. I think it was a fantastic idea, particularly because it makes sense: some people simply don't want to listen, especially if you are a pussy.
EldarEldrad
Savant
Absolutely no, premade companions is one of the major decline feature. The main issue with pre-made compaions is they been premade. Let's take an example. If I want to play Baldur's Gate as a Thief, that's mean I will not take Imoen in my party because I do not need second thief. So, in a party game with premade companions my own PC is inferior because I choose his skills and parameters not because I want something, but because there is something that is lacking in my chosen party roster. That leads to shifting focus from main character to premade companions. It leads further and further and then modern shit is created around companions only.
Ol' Willy
Arcane
So, you want a complete balance, so ranged and melee options would be equally viable?
Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,655
Maybe stop metagaming? Sounds like a very weird complaint you have, "I prefer no companions at all if the alternative is having optional companions that may overlap with my build".
Didn't this guy ended up dying because of a flamethrower? Good riddance tbh.
Apostle Hand
Liturgist
they have truly evolved in last couple of years
all that RPG stuff...hispter developers drinking vodka and wearing japanese clothes
high tech, cinematic visuals...new era of RPG rennaisance
RPG apocalypse
all that RPG stuff...hispter developers drinking vodka and wearing japanese clothes
high tech, cinematic visuals...new era of RPG rennaisance
RPG apocalypse
Depends on how you define "balance," but I think you're saying the opposite of what I am? My point is Sawyerism makes sure every build works in all situations, so if you mainline melee skills and perks in New Vegas you can still take on a bunch of ranged characters in a particular battle and not be fucked. I'd rather see more focus put on different abilities being exceptionally useful or not useful at all in certain situations, even if you can end up fucking yourself over by only being good with a bat while fighting 6 machine gunners. This is relatively common in CPRGs or whatever you want to call them, but not common at all in action RPGs.
Ol' Willy
Arcane
If you mean that, I completely agree. Melee should be secondary skill in a game where guns are extremely common. You will use it for stealth, sometimes to conserve ammo, in closed quarters, maybe some boxing rings to fight people, but when confronted by bunch of snipers/machine gunners/laser riflemen in an open field your chances should be quite low.
your link showing that weaker guy can roll higher (12) than experienced guy (max 10). and that weaker guy has higher chance to roll more than 8. This is already screw up, whatever logic you trying to present. There should be no case when weaker has higher chance for better result (thats why he is weaker). Whats the point of becoming more skilled? is this Oblivion level scaling explanation?
even if, this would be your aim, check this one:
weaker dude roll 1-13 => average 7
master dude roll 6-8 => average 7
weaker dude rolls are less reliable, but he can be lucky. While master receive what he expect.
but IMO, if you are more experienced you should only be better so:
weaker dude 1-13 => av 7
master dude 5-15 => av 10
you see what this did? master is doing +3 av dmg more, he never drop below 5 (more reliable), and have higher max possible (15). Still weaker dude, could be lucky.
--
I think you want to present that with experience old dude is losing some advantages over younger one. Very reasonable. Old, multiple wounded in the past warrior, could succumb to green, but fully functional men. But this could be represent by another factor. F.ex. reduced HP or initiative.
1st level warrior HP =20 , Initiative = 13
20 lvl warrior HP = 14 , Initiative = 3
====
honestly man, this normal distribution is an autism. One of the appealance of rpg systems is that the stats are not confusing, easy to understand. Bonus +1 damage, you know it will increase your 3-6 => 4-7. Games are for people, stupid also (like me). Mechanic should support the story that is tell, so the outcome of things is not totally abstract, is as simple as possible, and not an another workbook of math formulas to study.
f.ex.
"Would you manage to swim across this river?"
"no, because I take diving feature which increase my average score by 3, but my max is below the Difficulty Threshold now. I need to get drunk (to be able to roll more sided dice), and wear two full plate to reduce my swimming"
Lagi You misunderstand, I think. Exceptional > Ordinary, in terms of natural ability (stronger/faster/etc). This is represented by a larger dice range 10 vs 8. The Exceptional Journeyman is less experienced/practiced, so they roll 2d vs the 3d of the "Ordinary" Master. The Ordinary Master is favored to win 75% of the time. Even still, the mundane nature of the Ordinary Master means there are some things they will never be able to accomplish. Not everyone is special. The greater natural ability of the Exceptional Journeyman can sometimes overcome the difference in training/experience (1 dice difference), but only about 25% of the time, and even then, not by much. Finally, if you give the master superior equipment from a lifetime of adventuring, and his already favorable odds improve. Either way, the odds stay consistent and rational. All the possibilities are preserved, without letting probabilities getting absurd.
That's the real value of the system. Ability and experience are cleanly represented. There are several problems with D20 type linear systems. First off, one dice makes all outcomes random, which in no way represents increased experience/training. To overcome that, designers slap on a constant modifier (+X), which doesn't solve the random problem, leads to bloat, and causes the system to work poorly at the extreme ends of the dice. There is a reason why D&D has a reputation for being victim of RNG at low levels, and bloat at high levels. The "sweet spot", generally regarded as being from about Levels 8-15, is when those modifiers are about half the dice range, safely away from the extremes where the system breaks. Multi-dice system also keep the entire range intact, so that even a master could potentially trip on their shoelaces, rare as it might be. This isn't really possible in linear systems.
I don't think it's too complicated. Greater range = higher potential. More dice = reliability of realizing that potential. The dice can be manipulated in lots of sensible ways that are very intuitive. I truly think that the genre has been held back by ignoring the problems with linear systems. Even here on the Codex, people opine for systems which characters grow in breadth rather than chase higher numbers. A multi-dice system caters to that mentality by inherently restraining RNG whimsy on the low end, and bloat absurdity on the high end.
That's the real value of the system. Ability and experience are cleanly represented. There are several problems with D20 type linear systems. First off, one dice makes all outcomes random, which in no way represents increased experience/training. To overcome that, designers slap on a constant modifier (+X), which doesn't solve the random problem, leads to bloat, and causes the system to work poorly at the extreme ends of the dice. There is a reason why D&D has a reputation for being victim of RNG at low levels, and bloat at high levels. The "sweet spot", generally regarded as being from about Levels 8-15, is when those modifiers are about half the dice range, safely away from the extremes where the system breaks. Multi-dice system also keep the entire range intact, so that even a master could potentially trip on their shoelaces, rare as it might be. This isn't really possible in linear systems.
I don't think it's too complicated. Greater range = higher potential. More dice = reliability of realizing that potential. The dice can be manipulated in lots of sensible ways that are very intuitive. I truly think that the genre has been held back by ignoring the problems with linear systems. Even here on the Codex, people opine for systems which characters grow in breadth rather than chase higher numbers. A multi-dice system caters to that mentality by inherently restraining RNG whimsy on the low end, and bloat absurdity on the high end.
yes i didnt understand at first. This sound like a breakthrough. How long did you think about it? Did you write your pnp rpg system?
edit:
exp lvl give you more dice but still you chose the single highest. At some point you are 99% to roll max on dice. And further exp gain is waste of time. brilliant
with natural abilities (strength f.ex) you not necessary in cRPG need to roll 1d8 (1-8)
you could roll (3-9)
the progression could be
(1-8)
(2-8)
(2-9)
....
this is MASSIVE amount of space for design and character development still staying in some reasonable center number.
one more idea:
items could increase max value, abilities min value
strongman fist hit (strenght 4) dmg : 4-6
kid with knife (strenght 0, knife 3 dmg) dmg: 0-9
its very believable.
Last edited:
Sranchammer
Arcane
If RPGs had evolved, we'd all be playing RTS
Lagi This system isn’t totally unique. The Original Deadlands RPG used something similar. I have a home brew RPG, and it is 7 years in the making. I have tried every kind of dice combination you’ve never even heard of. Items work best as a constant modifier, whether they are armor, weapons, or other. Since you can resolve attack and damage in one roll by merely computing the difference, items will effectively increase your dice range, as you suggest.
So a street urchin with a knife might be represented as 1d6+2 (75% score at least a 4), and a novice boxer might be 2d8, take highest—having a 75% to roll at least a 5. Not a bad match-up. Give the urchin and extra circumstance dice if they have surprise, or the boxer a disarm talent and it gets interesting. It’s very granular and works with odd numbers too. Numbers don’t have to be small either. Add a zero across the board if you want more room to fidget. It also lends itself to a classes and perk/feat oriented design.
I think if designers took this approach, we’d have much better games.
So a street urchin with a knife might be represented as 1d6+2 (75% score at least a 4), and a novice boxer might be 2d8, take highest—having a 75% to roll at least a 5. Not a bad match-up. Give the urchin and extra circumstance dice if they have surprise, or the boxer a disarm talent and it gets interesting. It’s very granular and works with odd numbers too. Numbers don’t have to be small either. Add a zero across the board if you want more room to fidget. It also lends itself to a classes and perk/feat oriented design.
I think if designers took this approach, we’d have much better games.
Last edited:
I play this atrocious pnp 20 years ago, when i still have friends.
Roll bucket of dice for quick draw, roll for hit, roll for damage - then you was checking the success I forgot how. It take freaking AGES! I think faster was to make regiment combat round in warhammer FRP, that single hit in this game.
I remember rolling multiple dice, adding it all up, and divide by enemy size. the damage was soo pathetic low, that everyone go for akimbo sawn-off shotguns, come to touch enemy and shoot at once. And still the cowboy on the other end has high chance to survive.
plus there was some abuse with with dice reduction or/and exploding dice (if you roll d6 = 6, you roll again and add new value 6+3=9)
maybe there is newer iteration, need to check.
link pls
- Joined
- May 5, 2018
- Messages
- 6,066
-Every game should have the option to turn off AI. Currently playing Dawn Of War, and there is nothing more infuriating than the enemy having a high powered tank and ordering your own unit to attack it, but it attacks the units your soldiers are engaging in melee instead - and with the splash damage - sends ally and enemy soldiers across the screen.
-As per PF:K, allow the player to customise their characters build. Except bigger. I imagine a character build (in full plate) would look much like a Terminator would in Warhammer if he spent all his time swinging a two-handed axe the size of the ones we saw in PF:K. And the character model would look especially cool. I know he would have to eat a donkey everyday to maintain that build, but I don't care.
-As per PF:K, allow the player to customise their characters build. Except bigger. I imagine a character build (in full plate) would look much like a Terminator would in Warhammer if he spent all his time swinging a two-handed axe the size of the ones we saw in PF:K. And the character model would look especially cool. I know he would have to eat a donkey everyday to maintain that build, but I don't care.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.