TOASTER_TEAM'S PROFILE

You should also consider how the number of dice being rolled scales, because at a certain point both sides should expect to roll 6 every time. So if it were me, I'd look at allowing multiple dice to play a roll in the damage calculations. Maybe half your dice (rounded down) are added together and compared against the same number of dice on the defensive side (if available). The current concept of using only the highest dice still applies.

Hmm... that's true, didn't think of that. I want the max die roll to remain fairly low however. I'm thinking 5 for the very max but even then that's pretty high/likely to get a 6. This undermines my system as a whole which sucks because I like the idea of various range of successes. I don't like the idea of 100% failure/100% success.

This being said, I could move on to the next denominator. For example:

A rolls 3 die while B rolls 4.
A rolls: 3,2,6.
B rolls: 6,1,1,5.

If we compare both: the 6 even out, then we move on to the next in line, the 5 for B and the 3 for A. So that could work is a fairly pragmatic workaround to the point you brought up.

Or I could have a 6 based tie, re-roll the 6 to see who has the highest roll, that's also a simple solution.

I prefer giving each weapon 5 damage levels, based upon a die roll. That allows for better long term scaling with better weapons while maintaining the purpose of the die roll. Additionally, I think the high variance of the die roll is critical for this game design, because if you're not incorporating the full 1-6 range, then why bother making the game around dice at all? Just use standard random numbers.

I'd like you to give an example because I'm not sure I understand.

The armor protection idea you outlined (the last idea) sounds pretty cool, though there is definitely the issue with scaling. That is, if protection is high enough you are invincible, and if it is low enough, your armor is destroyed immediately. If you go this route, maybe look at some sort of percentage reduction instead?

I want to stick to D6, no percentage. If the armor idea I have right now can't tailor to that, then I need to change it.

You brought up good problems, I'm glad you did. That way, I can change the rules accordingly. I have until next Wednesday to have a polished system.

By all means challenge my ideas, that's the whole point of the thread.

I'd like to try to tweak my current system before getting rid of it.

So how about this:

The maximum difference between 1 and 6 is 5. That's the most difference you can have on a die. With my current system, there's too much of a "swing" with the weapon factor.

So here's what I'm thinking; both characters engaged in battle their respective amount of die keeping their own highest score and then compare.

Ex.: Rogue rolls 2 die and gets 3 and 5 while the goblin rolls 3. This means Rogue 5 vs goblin 3. Rogue hits the goblin with a margin of 2.


Then, the success margin determines the type of wound inflicted. As I said before the maximum is 5 so:

1-2: light wound
3-4: medium wound
5: critical wound

The type of wound actually inflicted is actually determined by the weapon factor.

Dagger: 1
Sword: 2
Two-handed sword: 3

Ex.:
Dagger:
Light Wound: 1
Medium Wound: 2
Critical Wound: 3

Sword:
Light Wound: 2
Medium Wound: 3
Critical Wound: 4

This would add a "step" in combat making it a bit more complex but with a much more manageable damage output so I think it's a fair trade-off. The step itself is easy to understand so it shouldn't confuse the player.

So in our example with the goblin and rogue from before, if she's equipped with a sword, she'd damage the goblin for 2 (light wound).

If they roll a tie, both take a light wound, both grazing each other. This would make sense since they almost both managed to win the round when comparing rolls.

As for armor, I don't want it to nullify damage. I think that's unrealistic how an armor would completely safeguard you. Or at least, if the armor does nullify some damage, it's minimal so I don't end up with walking tanks.

Perhaps armor could soak up damage and then gradually degrade as it takes more hits. Just brainstorming here, not certain.

Perhaps I could have two ratings for armor: protection and durability. Say a chain mail has a protection of 2 and a durability of 2. When dealing damage output, we compare the damage output to the armor.


The goblin wears a chain mail (2/2) and the rogue dealt it a blow of 2. If the blow is equal or under the protection of the armor, there is no damage but the durability goes down by 1. If the blow is higher than the protection, then the armor doesn't provide any protection?

That wouldn't make sense though. I don't like the idea of armor providing binary protection (something or nothing). Armor should always provide protection, just to a lesser degree to more powerful blows.

Any landed blow is influenced by the armor worn by the character, regardless of what the armor is. Lighter armor offer less protection but still provide some against any blow. I could just go for something really simple like two ratings;
protection reduces the damage and durability determines now many times the armor can provide protection.

Suppose a chain mail has a protection of 2 and a durability of 4. Rogue lands a hit on goblin with a damage output of 2. Chain mail reduces the 2 to 0 but durability goes down by 1, being now 3.

Again, this is problematic. It could mean the armor nullifying damage for too long in battle making things boring. Also, armor would only be useful at the beginning of the game or would require constant repair. I don't like that. It's unrealistic to think that armor would lose durability with every single strike. I mean, not in real life but in a game, some blows would dent the protection but not to the extent where durability would be compromised. The force of the blow should factor in.

So how about this instead: any damage equal or under the armor's protection rating is reduced by a certain amount without damaging the durability. Any damage higher than the protection still reduces damage but reduces durability.

For example: chain mail has a protection of 1 and a durability of 3. If the blow has a strength of 2, it surpasses the protection of the chain mail. The damage is reduced by 1 (protection of the chain mail) but the durability is reduced by 2, falling to 2. So the goblin takes 1 damage to its health and his armor durability goes down by 1.

If the blow had been of 1, then the chain mail would have nullified the damage and durability wouldn't have gone down.

I feel like that's a better compromise but could still lead to armor making battles too long as they would provide too much protection.

Thoughts?

@Ramshakin:

So when the rouge and goblin engage in combat, only one of them does damage?

Yes, unless they end up getting the same result, in which case they both take damage, sort of like in a real scuffle where you both manage to land a hit on each other.

The advantage is giving the developer finer control over the probability and, ultimately, the game balance. You're also able to have "powerful" dice for special weapons or abilities. Say a standard die has 4 single marks, 1 double, and 1 blank. A power die has 3 single and 3 double marks. A sword lets you roll 3 normal dice, while a flaming dragon sword lets you roll 2 normal and 1 power die. Or a wizard's ability lets them swap a normal die for a power die on an intelligence check.

My concern here is having a variety of die will make things too complicated. The reason why I aimed at a D6 was because it's fairly common. If I have to design more than 2 sets of die for various situations, I feel like that's too complicated.

An alternative is a combat system similar to Eclipse, which uses standard dice. The 1-6 roll determines whether that die hits or misses, and the damage is based on the color of the die. Yellow dice do 1 damage, orange dice do 2, and red dice do 4. The amount and color of dice you roll is based on your weapon.

Again, this would involve different sets of die. If I'm to design a special die, I'd like it to be able to cover all of the game's mechanics like a normal D6 would. If using special die involves multiple sets, I feel that's a shortcoming.

Thanks for the suggestions though!

@Ramshackin:

Hello!

Regarding your question:

Why do characters bother rolling multiple dice if only one of the rolls matter?

5. When a close combat attack is initiated, characters involved roll their combat in dice.
Ex.: Rogue rolls 2 dice against a goblin which rolls 1.

The rogue rolls 3 and 5 while goblin rolls 3.

6. The highest score is selected. The highest score wins.
Ex.: Rogue gets a score of 5 while goblin gets a score of 3.

So basically, if you roll multiple die, you select the highest score from all of them and discard the others. So if you roll 5 die and get: 2,2,5,3,1; you'd pick 5. This means that you have a higher chance to get a higher score.

From a gameplay perspective, this means that a less skilled fighter can win a round in battle against are skilled opponent although it won't very often.

Regarding your second question:

What's the point of rolling higher or lower than your opponent when, ultimately, you share the same base damage?

Well, it's two-fold.

1. The higher the roll difference, the higher the potential damage.
Ex: Rogue rolls a 6 and goblin rolls 1. Rogue succeeds at +5 (6-1). I'll finish answering this in 2.

2. You don't share the same base damage. It depends on your weapon. Everyone is limited to a certain range of weapons:

Ex: The weapon factor for a sword is 1. This is the standard for most common weapons.
The weapon factor for the dagger is 0.5. This is the standard for smaller, weaker weapons.

So you success range is +5, you'd have different damage potential depending on the weapon: 0,5; 1; 1.5; 2, etc... I don't aim to go higher than 2 for balancing purposes but you get the gist of it.

It seems like the only number that matters in combat is the weapon factor, so why even roll the dice?

No, no. I mean, the weapon factor only comes into play when you manage to score a hit when comparing rolls.

Regarding balance, 1-6 is a huge variance. Some board games with dice based combat opt for special, more balanced dice. For example, 2 sides are blank, 2 sides have a single damage mark, 2 sides have a double damage mark.

I like the idea of custom die and I did consider it. The issue I find with that is ultimately the lack of variance you mentioned. It'd be fine if it were only for combat. But I need also need die for: casting spells, skill checks, random game checks and so on. I therefore find the lack of 6 different possibilities rather limiting to the point where it becomes a hindrance when designing systems.

Anyways, thanks for commenting the mechanics. I'd be interested in what you have in mind for the custom die and how you would handle it. I'm not closed to the idea, I just need to be careful about it. I don't want the die to end up being problematic as opposed to be a facilitator.

That's why I need to plan ahead in great detail so we don't end up taking back steps when it comes to coding.

Here’s an explanation of what I have in mind for battle.

1. Each character can move a certain amount of squares every turn. This action is granted for free every turn.

2. Each character has a combat value, represented by a skull. The higher the better.

3. The combat value is translated as dice rolled. A combat of 3 means rolling three dice and a number of 2, 2 dice etc…


I'd like to animate the die actually rolling but it'll fiendishly difficult in 2D as opposed to use 3d. So I'm pushing it that back until I have a better idea of how to do it.


4. There’s no order per se as far as close combat is concerned. It’s not like D&D when you attack, then your enemy attacks. Explained further in 5.

5. When a close combat attack is initiated, characters involved roll their combat in dice.
Ex.: Rogue rolls 2 dice against a goblin which rolls 1.
The rogue rolls 3 and 5 while goblin rolls 3.

6. The highest score is selected. The highest score wins.
Ex.: Rogue gets a score of 5 while goblin gets a score of 3.

7. Then determine the difference between the 5 and the 3. This would be done automatically through coding.
Ex.: In this case, it’s 2.

8. The difference is then influenced by the damage of the weapon used. Weaker weapons have a smaller damage factor while more powerful ones have a higher damage number.

Ex: The weapon factor for a sword is 1. This is the standard for most common weapons.
The weapon factor for the dagger is 0.5. This is the standard for smaller, weaker weapons.

Let’s say the rogue is using a sword and the goblin a dagger.

The Rogue would get a damage output of 2 (2x1) while the goblin would get a damage output of 1 (2x0.5).

9. The next step is adding in armor. One way to do this could be to have armor reduce the amount of damage taken by a certain amount. While this is the most practical way of using armor, I also feel like I could be more original here. For one thing, I’d like armor to degrade as it’s being hit, offering less and less protection with wear and tear.

10. Whatever damage output remains is reduced from the health pool of the character. For example, a goblin with 3 health would be down to 1 health after being injured.

One thing I need to keep in mind is that risk of one-hit kill, especially when it comes to player characters. If a player character rolls a 1 and the enemy rolls a 6, he could potentially take a 5 health points loss. My current player characters have a low health count at the moment, so I need to adjust this accordingly.

11. Morale: this is a concept I want to put in to mitigate RGN. The player has a pool of morale points which are refreshed each turn. He can use MP (morale points) to influence the result of a roll. For example, he can spend one MP to increase a die roll of one point, turning a 4 into 5. I find this will allow players some control on the outcome of roll die.

Morale in of itself could also be influenced by the results of battle. Again, I’m on the fence about this. A losing party would be in ever bigger trouble if the RNG isn’t going their way. On the other hand, an already winning party would be in an even better position because there would be even more Morale points available.

_________________________________________________________________________________

So here it is. What do you guys think? I need to be 100% sure about this before we go into coding to avoid any backtracking which is a big no-no.