Dice

[The Shadow]

There are plenty of corner cases where alternate die could be used without stressing new players. And sometimes there's some fun to be had in doing things a little different and making the minimal effort required to look at the table of contents or index and flip to a particular page.

I doubt people today are any less capable than they were in the 70s and 80s, and AD&D had plenty of sub-tables and a variety of resolution systems.

It's not a question of capability. I was capable of handling the variety of systems back then at the age of 11, and I'm certainly capable of handling them now.

I just don't WANT to. And no, I don't find looking up an arcane rule that is more complicated than it needs to be to be fun. At all. 3e's unified mechanic was a breath of fresh air. (Well, D&D-wise, anyway. I had already encountered the idea in other games.)

 

[F700]

It's not a question of capability. I was capable of handling the variety of systems back then at the age of 11, and I'm certainly capable of handling them now.

I just don't WANT to. And no, I don't find looking up an arcane rule that is more complicated than it needs to be to be fun. At all. 3e's unified mechanic was a breath of fresh air. (Well, D&D-wise, anyway. I had already encountered the idea in other games.)

Why does an alternate resolution system have to be more complicated than it needs to be? If multiple dice that aren't d20s are inherently more complex they need to ditch the current damage system.

 

[slobster]

Why does an alternate resolution system have to be more complicated than it needs to be? If multiple dice that aren't d20s are inherently more complex they need to ditch the current damage system.

The multiple dice that can be used for damage is more complex than, strictly speaking, it needs to be. You could, for instance, decide that all weapons and attacks deal d6.

Damage rolls are different than action resolutions, though. For one, different damage dice makes some amount of sense. It seems reasonable that a hit from a greataxe hurts more than a slash from a dirk. Another difference is that damage rolls are fairly self-contained. Players tend to attack with one type of weapon, so they roll the same damage dice each time. Monster stat blocks have damage dice listed right next to the attack bonus, so you don't have to look up any rules that you wouldn't have anyway.It doesn't slow down the game or lead to much confusion. It may be more complex than available alternatives, but I consider it complexity well spent.

Resolving action resolution with a bunch of different dice conventions is also more complex than available alternatives. But figuring out which dice to use slows down play if you need to look it up in the rulebook. It's not something that each player can remember for himself, like damage rolls, because each character is likely to participate in a variety of tasks, each requiring its own dice, over the course of play. You can transition between different tasks, and thus different dice rolls, rapidly and without warning during a game. For people who haven't memorized the whole complex system, that could mean flipping back and forth between relevant pages as actions resolve and players react in unexpected ways. Then you find cases that the rules don't quite cover, and you have to adjudicate which of the many standards you should adapt to the problem at hand.

Much simpler to be able to fall back on "roll a d20, add some modifiers, beat a DC". It also lets you set standard numbers for DCs of a certain difficulty. That simplifies a mess of competing resolution systems for a single table that says "DC10=easy, DC15=intermediate, DC20=complex". That's something you can't do with a system splut among a bunch of different dice systems.

 

[F700]

I agree with you in principle, but as I said initially, corner cases can include alterate resolution systems without abandoning the unified d20 system.

1) they don't come up that often, that's why they're corner cases.

2) they're probably more likely to be encountered by more advanced players who should have no problem implementing a new rule.

One of the things I miss about AD&D is scrounging through a table looking for an additional +2 modifier, or getting a result from one table and moving onto the appropriate sub-table.

Plus, my other dice are jealous of the d20s.

 

[slobster]

I agree with you in principle, but as I said initially, corner cases can include alterate resolution systems without abandoning the unified d20 system.

1) they don't come up that often, that's why they're corner cases.

2) they're probably more likely to be encountered by more advanced players who should have no problem implementing a new rule.

One of the things I miss about AD&D is scrounging through a table looking for an additional +2 modifier, or getting a result from one table and moving onto the appropriate sub-table.

Plus, my other dice are jealous of the d20s.

I guess I'd need to see some examples to know whether I agree with you or not. I like the unified mechanic, but I also have a high tolerance for quirky, so I might end up liking a few artfully executed exceptions as well.

 

[F700]

I guess I'd need to see some examples to know whether I agree with you or not. I like the unified mechanic, but I also have a high tolerance for quirky, so I might end up liking a few artfully executed exceptions as well.

Something simple yet fun - a small sub-table in a spell description, utilizing something other than a d20.

1d6 giving 6 different monsters to summon with summon monster 1, 2d6 for 2 and so forth, as an example. There's a few spells that have had random effects stripped out. Since you're already looking at the spell description, it's not a big deal.

Now, that's not resolution per se - aside from resolving the spell - but at least there're some alternate dice combos hitting the table.

How about some of the old mechanics for determining whether or not equipment is damaged with exposure to fire, acid, etc? They were quick and simple.

Definately more percentage chances, in my opinion.

 

[slobster]

Something simple yet fun - a small sub-table in a spell description, utilizing something other than a d20.

1d6 giving 6 different monsters to summon with summon monster 1, 2d6 for 2 and so forth, as an example. There's a few spells that have had random effects stripped out. Since you're already looking at the spell description, it's not a big deal.

Now, that's not resolution per se - aside from resolving the spell - but at least there're some alternate dice combos hitting the table.

How about some of the old mechanics for determining whether or not equipment is damaged with exposure to fire, acid, etc? They were quick and simple.

Definately more percentage chances, in my opinion.

Ok, that kind of stuff is completely suited to different dice. If you have between 1 and 4 monsters coming out from a spell, I don't think anyone is seriously proposing that you roll a d20 and divide by 5 rather than just rolling the durn d4!

In trying to come up with places where I might be ok with non-d20 action resolution mechanics, the one thing I came up with so far is duels. I've never seen a D&D duel mechanic that I found completely satisfying, but I've had plenty of occasions over the years where I needed to run an epic, climactic duel anyway. I've always futzed an ad-hoc solution, but that hasn't stopped me from wanting a better solution.

Since duels are going to be dramatic and climactic by their very nature, and also quite rare, I think that they are a good example of where some exception-based design might work well. I don't have a good idea of how to do it (yet . . . ), but I can see a place for weird dice being rolled and compared in ways that are unlike normal gameplay, to enhance the drama and drive home the idea that this moment matters, you should pay attention to it and remember it!