Options for Supernatural Attributes?

[Khaalis]

So, I've been going over WOIN again in its final form to see if it can support my design needs.

Background Info:
For this discussion, the key fact for the system I want is that species really matters, and that Supernatural species exist and effectively rule the world. Think of a Star Wars Empire vs. Rebellion feel where Supernaturals [Dragons, Jotuns and Fey] are the "Empire(s)". However, in the setting their are Lesser Supernaturals that can be played as NPCs (Drakes, Giants, and some species of Fey) as well as non-supernatural species of the Empires (Dragonborn/Kobolds, Ogre-kin, etc.).

The Issue:
What I would really want to do is treat all attributes on the same scale but be able to show the difference between Normal and Supernatural Attributes.

For instance a Human with a 3 STR is averagely strong for a Human while a Giant with a 3 STR is averagely strong for a Giant. However, the Giant with a 3 STR should still be superior to the 3 STR human.

What I am currently thinking is to represent this Scaling Difference by increasing the Die Type (d8 or d10 depending on species and amount of bonus) of Supernatural attributes. This would be in the form of a Species Exploit.

Its a bit more complex and slightly more bookkeeping to track but would represent the difference without having to simply increase Attribute Values (so that for instance 3 is Average for a Human but 9 is average for a Giant) - which is always a problem I had with systems like d20. Keep in mind that this would not be ALL attributes for the species, only a few that really matter (like STR & END for a Giant).

If increasing the Die Type doesn't work, I have a few other ideas.

Option 2: Treat any Dice Pool with a Supernatural Attribute included as 2 Grades higher for figuring Maximum Die Pool.

Option 3: (The least desirable.) Increase the amount of Species Attribute bonuses from +4 per species to +12 but state that these Species only begin with an Origin and 1 Less Career than other Species (so 3 Careers). The problem here is, is an extra +8 attributes (2 careers worth) worth the same as losing skills and exploits?


Thoughts?

 

[Morrus]

The increasing die method has been playtested as an idea for low level superpowers. It works, but it gets a lot more swingy than you might expect.

 

[Morrus]

(As a point of interest, the increasing die size was the actual core mechanic in very, very early playtest iterations of the game).

 

[TiwazTyrsfist]

Rather than larger dice (d8, d10) consider a static bonus per die.
The average role on a d6 is 3.5 (6!/6) while the average roll on a d8 is 4.5 and a d10 is 5.5
So, if you want to go up one step, give them a +1 per die, if you want to go up two steps give them a +2 per die, etc. This makes their results much better on average but doesn't make them swingy.

Rolling 4d6 gives a 4 thru 24, average 14
Rolling 4d10 gives 4 thru 40, average 22
Rolling 4(d6+2) or 4d6+8 gives 12 thru 32, average 22
More reliable, same average.

Another thing you might consider is raising their Dice Pool Grade Cap for specific attributes. I.E. A starting grade 5 character caps all check pools (before exploits) at 5d6. Give them a max pool bonus. Maybe for Giants, their Str and End pools always cap 1d6 higher. For Jotuns, 2d6 higher.

So, a Human with 9 str, 5 sword skill, and a high Quality Sword gets 6d6, BUT is capped at 5d6. A giant with the same gets 6d6, But his cap is 6d6 so he gets all his dice. So with the same Att, Skill, Equipment, and Grade, the Giant will usually do better because his cap is higher and he gets an extra die.

 

[TiwazTyrsfist]

Personally, one of my favorite super power mechanics is from Aberrant by White Wolf.
One of the things you could buy was Mega-Attributes. They added to your regular Attribute of the same type, but you had to use distinct dice or roll them separately.
Basically, you rolled d10's, and counted how many beat a target number (usually 6) for your total number of successes, and that determined how well you did.
Any Mega Att die that beat the target number counted as TWO successes, and any Mega Att die that rolled a 10 counted as THREE successes.

So, a person with 4 strength and a person with 2 strength and 2 Mega-strength both rolled 4 dice, but the one with mega strength could conceivably get 8 successes on a perfect roll, and usually got at least one more success than the normal character.

But that doesn't translate well to this system.

 

[Khaalis]

(As a point of interest, the increasing die size was the actual core mechanic in very, very early playtest iterations of the game).

I remember that, but if I remember correctly, it was an across the board implementation based on Grade. So after hitting X Grade your whole die pool changed from d6 to d8, then to d10 etc. Correct?

Edit: Forgot to include the quote.

 

[Khaalis]

Rather than larger dice (d8, d10) consider a static bonus per die.
The average role on a d6 is 3.5 (6!/6) while the average roll on a d8 is 4.5 and a d10 is 5.5
So, if you want to go up one step, give them a +1 per die, if you want to go up two steps give them a +2 per die, etc. This makes their results much better on average but doesn't make them swingy.

Rolling 4d6 gives a 4 thru 24, average 14
Rolling 4d10 gives 4 thru 40, average 22
Rolling 4(d6+2) or 4d6+8 gives 12 thru 32, average 22
More reliable, same average.

So apparently replying to a response via email on the thread gets eaten by the ether... as I had replied to Morrus's response with exactly this question.

Another thing you might consider is raising their Dice Pool Grade Cap for specific attributes. I.E. A starting grade 5 character caps all check pools (before exploits) at 5d6. Give them a max pool bonus. Maybe for Giants, their Str and End pools always cap 1d6 higher. For Jotuns, 2d6 higher.

So, a Human with 9 str, 5 sword skill, and a high Quality Sword gets 6d6, BUT is capped at 5d6. A giant with the same gets 6d6, But his cap is 6d6 so he gets all his dice. So with the same Att, Skill, Equipment, and Grade, the Giant will usually do better because his cap is higher and he gets an extra die.

Yeah, this was the "Option 2" I included but was thinking a 2 Step Grade increase to ensure always having the 1 extra die cap. However, I'm not certain its enough to actually feel "superior" unless you guarantee to always have more dice. In other words it doesn't feel as universally applicable as say the "+2 bonus per SN Attribute Die" option.

Personally, one of my favorite super power mechanics is from Aberrant by White Wolf.
One of the things you could buy was Mega-Attributes. They added to your regular Attribute of the same type, but you had to use distinct dice or roll them separately.
Basically, you rolled d10's, and counted how many beat a target number (usually 6) for your total number of successes, and that determined how well you did.
Any Mega Att die that beat the target number counted as TWO successes, and any Mega Att die that rolled a 10 counted as THREE successes.

So, a person with 4 strength and a person with 2 strength and 2 Mega-strength both rolled 4 dice, but the one with mega strength could conceivably get 8 successes on a perfect roll, and usually got at least one more success than the normal character.

But that doesn't translate well to this system.

Actually it might apply. I was seriously looking at the the Alternate Dice Rolling Methods and thinking about implementing the "Roll 4+" or "Roll 5+" options as it would be more familiar to my players as it is more like Shadowrun and Whitewolf, as well as being a lot less math intensive (as yes adding up 5-7 d6 can get cumbersome after a while as we learned in our d6 Star Wars games).

In such a case as this type of rolling method (Counting successes), increasing die types would work quite well.

The Aberrant system option is intriguing, however, I think I would go with an Exploding dice option over an automatic +1 success on 'MaxValueRolled'. Together with increased die type in the count successes method, I think this could work well.

So using your former example and the Roll 4+ Method:
* HUMAN "9 STR (3d6), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 2.5 successes or a Challenging/Difficult Success

* GIANT "9 STR (3d8), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 2.88 successes or a lets say (3) Difficult Success (+1 Difficulty Steps)
* GIANT "9 STR (3d8; d8's Explode), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 3.44 successes or a Difficult Success (+1 Difficulty Steps)

* GIANT "9 STR (3d10), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 3.1 successes or a Difficult Success (+0 or 1 Difficulty Steps)
* GIANT "9 STR (3d10; d10's Explode), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 4.07 successes or a Strenuous Success (+3 Difficulty Steps)

(d10's are much cleaner)


The major problem with the Alternate Rolling Method is that it requires a complete revamp of the system's Success Targets including revamping PC Creation for things like Defense Scores, etc. Looking at Defense I think this would get quite ugly as you have to divide everything by 7. It would, I think, actually require re-writing the section to provide the math already converted (thus Defenses would be: Pool of 1-2 dice = Defense 1; Pool of 3-4 dice = 2 Defense, etc.). Then of course Size modifiers have to be changed as well.


So, when compared to the initial idea of simply adding +2 to the roll for each SN Attribute Die, we get:
* HUMAN "9 STR, 5 sword (2d6) skill for 5d6" = Average of 17.5 or a Difficult Success
* GIANT "9 STR (3d6+6), 5 sword (2d6) skill for 5d6+6" = Average of 23.5 or a Demanding Success (+1 Difficulty Step)

If you add the extra die from gear and raising the Pool Cap to 6d6:
* GIANT "9 STR (3d6+6), 5 sword & Gear (3d6) skill for 6d6+6" = Average of 27 or a Strenuous Success (+2 Difficulty Steps)


I'm honestly not sure which I prefer. I really like the Counting Successes Method over the Summing Method of resolution but I'm not sure the gain in speed and 'ease of play' is worth the math/re-writing of the core Difficulty system. If it were just on the GM side it wouldn't be so bad, but changing the Difficulties effects PCs as well and could lead to some confusion (unless say re-written as a "core" setting rule presented as the only way the setting works and keeping all the math hidden).


Then of course is the question of the Value of a Supernatural Attribute as opposed to other benefits. Is having say 2 SN Attributes worth a whole Career Level? Is it worth about the same as the standard +4 Attributes given in a species? Is it worth something like "you do not gain Attribute bonuses from your 1st Career"? Is it worth about the same as an Exploit? 2 Exploits?


Thoughts?


PS: This raises a question about the OGL. How much of the Rules could be reproduced in an altered form? For instance if I want to do a campaign setting that uses the Alternate Dice Method, can I include reproduced sections for say "Defenses" that uses the new Difficulties table or would I have to say something like "DEFENSES: Reference page X of WOIN to figure your base Defense then divide the result by Y."?

On a similar note, how much reproduction does the OGL include overall? If I wanted to say make a campaign setting based off OLD but with all different Races, Careers, Equipment (including the new equipment optional rules), etc. ... could I produce a whole new Campaign World Specific version of the OLD book or would the setting book need to only present the new material and list whole sections of "Refer to OLD p.X"?

 

[Morrus]

PS: This raises a question about the OGL. How much of the Rules could be reproduced in an altered form? For instance if I want to do a campaign setting that uses the Alternate Dice Method, can I include reproduced sections for say "Defenses" that uses the new Difficulties table or would I have to say something like "DEFENSES: Reference page X of WOIN to figure your base Defense then divide the result by Y."?

On a similar note, how much reproduction does the OGL include overall? If I wanted to say make a campaign setting based off OLD but with all different Races, Careers, Equipment (including the new equipment optional rules), etc. ... could I produce a whole new Campaign World Specific version of the OLD book or would the setting book need to only present the new material and list whole sections of "Refer to OLD p.X"?

Step 1: read the OGL. It contains all its own instructions.

I can try to answer specific questions about any parts of it you don't understand, but I think you'll be OK - it's fairly short.

 

[Khaalis]

So apparently replying to a response via email on the thread gets eaten by the ether... as I had replied to Morrus's response with exactly this question.


Yeah, this was the "Option 2" I included but was thinking a 2 Step Grade increase to ensure always having the 1 extra die cap. However, I'm not certain its enough to actually feel "superior" unless you guarantee to always have more dice. In other words it doesn't feel as universally applicable as say the "+2 bonus per SN Attribute Die" option.



Actually it might apply. I was seriously looking at the the Alternate Dice Rolling Methods and thinking about implementing the "Roll 4+" or "Roll 5+" options as it would be more familiar to my players as it is more like Shadowrun and Whitewolf, as well as being a lot less math intensive (as yes adding up 5-7 d6 can get cumbersome after a while as we learned in our d6 Star Wars games).

In such a case as this type of rolling method (Counting successes), increasing die types would work quite well.

The Aberrant system option is intriguing, however, I think I would go with an Exploding dice option over an automatic +1 success on 'MaxValueRolled'. Together with increased die type in the count successes method, I think this could work well.

So using your former example and the Roll 4+ Method:
* HUMAN "9 STR (3d6), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 2.5 successes or a Challenging/Difficult Success

* GIANT "9 STR (3d8), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 2.88 successes or a lets say (3) Difficult Success (+1 Difficulty Steps)
* GIANT "9 STR (3d8; d8's Explode), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 3.44 successes or a Difficult Success (+1 Difficulty Steps)

* GIANT "9 STR (3d10), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 3.1 successes or a Difficult Success (+0 or 1 Difficulty Steps)
* GIANT "9 STR (3d10; d10's Explode), 5 sword skill (2d6)" = Average of 4.07 successes or a Strenuous Success (+3 Difficulty Steps)

(d10's are much cleaner)


The major problem with the Alternate Rolling Method is that it requires a complete revamp of the system's Success Targets including revamping PC Creation for things like Defense Scores, etc. Looking at Defense I think this would get quite ugly as you have to divide everything by 7. It would, I think, actually require re-writing the section to provide the math already converted (thus Defenses would be: Pool of 1-2 dice = Defense 1; Pool of 3-4 dice = 2 Defense, etc.). Then of course Size modifiers have to be changed as well.


So, when compared to the initial idea of simply adding +2 to the roll for each SN Attribute Die, we get:
* HUMAN "9 STR, 5 sword (2d6) skill for 5d6" = Average of 17.5 or a Difficult Success
* GIANT "9 STR (3d6+6), 5 sword (2d6) skill for 5d6+6" = Average of 23.5 or a Demanding Success (+1 Difficulty Step)

If you add the extra die from gear and raising the Pool Cap to 6d6:
* GIANT "9 STR (3d6+6), 5 sword & Gear (3d6) skill for 6d6+6" = Average of 27 or a Strenuous Success (+2 Difficulty Steps)


I'm honestly not sure which I prefer. I really like the Counting Successes Method over the Summing Method of resolution but I'm not sure the gain in speed and 'ease of play' is worth the math/re-writing of the core Difficulty system. If it were just on the GM side it wouldn't be so bad, but changing the Difficulties effects PCs as well and could lead to some confusion (unless say re-written as a "core" setting rule presented as the only way the setting works and keeping all the math hidden).


Then of course is the question of the Value of a Supernatural Attribute as opposed to other benefits. Is having say 2 SN Attributes worth a whole Career Level? Is it worth about the same as the standard +4 Attributes given in a species? Is it worth something like "you do not gain Attribute bonuses from your 1st Career"? Is it worth about the same as an Exploit? 2 Exploits?

Any Thoughts?

 

[Morrus]

Any Thoughts?

I think it looks like a lot of effort, and I'm not sure what the gain is.