What's more fun - a die or a number?

[Blue]

There's a truism that RPG players like rolling dice. It's a cliche because it's true. But it's not everything.

Would I rather have a static number or a die added to my AC? A static number. A die introduces a whole new roll at various times. But since the poll itself said "an extra die", that's likely not the case.

For an extra die, as long as it's not cumbersome. If you have four different conditionals that add dice, and oh yeah another party member has a trigger that will let you add another - that's cumbersome. But would be for static numbers as well. Something like SA or Divine Smite where it's a clear choice and you know when it comes in - that I'd rather the dice.

A static number is best if it's always going to be there and can just be added to the math and not worried about. In D&D a magic sword that added +d4 to attack would be wearisome.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I feel like the answer is almost objectively an extra die. The question was what's more fun.

Yes, a number may be more suitable for game balance or speed of play or for any other number of reasons.....but as an expression of fun, I think the chance associated with a die roll is more fun than simply saying a number.

 

[CubicsRube]

I feel like the answer is almost objectively an extra die. The question was what's more fun.

Yes, a number may be more suitable for game balance or speed of play or for any other number of reasons.....but as an expression of fun, I think the chance associated with a die roll is more fun than simply saying a number.

Disagree.

What's more fun for me is the story. More time in mechanics and adding up numbers detract from the fun. So a number is neutral for me, while an extra die is a hindrance to fun.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Disagree.

What's more fun for me is the story. More time in mechanics and adding up numbers detract from the fun. So a number is neutral for me, while an extra die is a hindrance to fun.

Yeah this. Rolling dice is fun. Progressing the game smoothly and not getting hung up on stuff is more fun. 5E uses a lot of "extra die" mechanics, and you know what? it's the worse for them. Until I'd played 5E extensively, I might have thought these mechanics were more fun, but in reality they tend to slow things down, confuse people or even get forgotten in situations where a bonus probably wouldn't have been.

The least offensive approach is something like Advantage/Disadvantage, but when you're adding differently sized dice to a roll, that's kind of annoying.

I feel like the answer is almost objectively an extra die. The question was what's more fun.

Yes, a number may be more suitable for game balance or speed of play or for any other number of reasons.....but as an expression of fun, I think the chance associated with a die roll is more fun than simply saying a number.

I often agree with your posts, but this is nowhere near objective, because balance and speed of play, and simplicity, and smooth gameplay, and so on all factor into what is "fun". "Fun" is an overall metric, I'd suggest. Yeah, rolling extra dice can be "fun" in a short-term sort of way, but if it slows the game down, is inconsequential anyway (as it often is in 5E), and gets forgotten or confused or whatever, then that can actively detract from the overall "fun". I feel like stuff like Bless/Bane, Bardic Inspiration and so on all show this. It's seriously "Feelsbadman" when you use Bardic Inspiration and still fail and then it's gone, and Bless/Bane often get forgotten or players get confused about what they apply to, or you roll and still no change and none of that feels good, but it does slow things down or lead to "OH WAIT dammit ugh" (and the DM having to decide whether to backtrack on a result or whatever - usually they don't of course, which is fine but again means it isn't "fun").

 

[hawkeyefan]

Disagree.

What's more fun for me is the story. More time in mechanics and adding up numbers detract from the fun. So a number is neutral for me, while an extra die is a hindrance to fun.

Sure, that's valid. I do think it largely depends on the exact context and also the rules that are already in place and how complex a game may already be or not. As a fan of simpler mechanics myself, I would generally agree that whatever keeps things moving fastest is usually best.

But at the same time, something like Advantage is simpler than adding a static number. So I don't think that a static bonus is always the easier option.

I often agree with your posts, but this is nowhere near objective, because balance and speed of play, and simplicity, and smooth gameplay, and so on all factor into what is "fun". "Fun" is an overall metric, I'd suggest. Yeah, rolling extra dice can be "fun" in a short-term sort of way, but if it slows the game down, is inconsequential anyway (as it often is in 5E), and gets forgotten or confused or whatever, then that can actively detract from the overall "fun". I feel like stuff like Bless/Bane, Bardic Inspiration and so on all show this. It's seriously "Feelsbadman" when you use Bardic Inspiration and still fail and then it's gone, and Bless/Bane often get forgotten or players get confused about what they apply to, or you roll and still no change and none of that feels good, but it does slow things down or lead to "OH WAIT dammit ugh" (and the DM having to decide whether to backtrack on a result or whatever - usually they don't of course, which is fine but again means it isn't "fun").

Sure, this is all valid as well.

My answer was more about at the most basic level, given that no context was really given by Morrus in the OP. I definitely agree with you both that depending on many other factors, a static bonus may be far more preferable. My answer was also more about that specific instance of play rather than the overall impact (again, without knowing the specifics of rules and play speed and all that).

To me, let's say you offer a player the choice of a +2 bonus or he can roll a d4 to determine the bonus......I think that the act of choosing the +2 is the safe choice, and the d4 is the risky choice, which I think is inherently more fun because there's uncertainty involved. So that's how I was looking at it.

But yeah, you guys are both right that there may be much more compelling reasons to have static bonuses compared to dice rolls, and that they may help to maintain a game's level of fun overall.

 

[Lanefan]

To me, let's say you offer a player the choice of a +2 bonus or he can roll a d4 to determine the bonus......I think that the act of choosing the +2 is the safe choice, and the d4 is the risky choice, which I think is inherently more fun because there's uncertainty involved.

The d4 is also the better choice. Sure you risk dropping to a +1 but there's twice the chance you'll do better than the base +2.

But yeah, you guys are both right that there may be much more compelling reasons to have static bonuses compared to dice rolls, and that they may help to maintain a game's level of fun overall.

This might almost be table-dependent; a table with a generally slower pace of play would probably find dice more fun, a table with a hurry-up pace of play would likely prefer the flat numbers.

That said, this thread has given me ideas for how I might handle some area-buff spells e.g. Prayer when cast by Clerics of particularly Chaotic deities: instead of a flat bonus, the bonus would be determined on each swing or event by a second die roll - more chaotic and unpredictable - averaging out to what the spell gives as a flat bonus. Thus, if the spell normally gives +1, the die roll would be d3-1 for possible results of +0, +1 or +2.

What's stopping me from doing this immediately is two things: one, it'd be a lot more dice-rolling and two (and more relevant) in my game there's currently no characters in play to whom this new idea would apply.

 

[aramis erak]

In a tabletop RPG do you find it more fun for a bonus to take the forum of a static number (e.g. +2, +4 etc.) or an additional die (e.g. +1d6)?

For me it's the latter -- the tactile element of rolling an extra die; it feels more significant (even if the numbers work out the same); it feels less like maths (even though it isn't). It's very much a 'feels' thing.

For me, I like the extra die better, but it often makes the decision process that much harder... and then there was the time in FFG Star Wars that one character rolled 4y 3g 3r 3p 15b 10k... involving invoking over 10 talents and 4 pieces of tech... and the target doing similarly... hence the really big pools of bad dice.

I feel also that, in a short term game — 2–3 months — the die is better, but once you cross 4-5 months, those extra dice become bad for the overall balance of the game if there's also an experience system.

For example, a starting VTM1e PC might be rolling 5-9 dice, but an experienced PC is rolling 10-15 dice or more... and that just gets physically cumbersome.

FFG Star Wars gets to cumbersome pools between 200 and 400 xp...

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

If it is an important dramatic roll where the extra dice come from sources other than basic competence I think the bonus dice are more fun. If it is round 5 of combat against the band of 20 kobolds, yet another opportunity to throw extra dice seems more like a hinderance to fun.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Dice are always more fun, but they do get a bit time consuming.

For a permanent modifier to a d20, I prefer a flat number. Concise and fast and d20s do feel a bit cumbersome with other dice.

For a situational modifier to a d20, I prefer another die. Obvious that you don't forget.

For damage, I prefer a die until I get to about 4 to 6 dice. Then it starts to get a bit tedious and regression towards the mean makes large dice pools increasingly less swingy and dramatic.

 

[GMMichael]

(even if the numbers work out the same); it feels less like maths (even though it isn't). It's very much a 'feels' thing.

Agreed with the Feels, but it's hard for the maths to work out the same when the average result of the die usually includes a fraction. Which is why I let players choose between a random result (die) and a slightly-less-than-average result (number).

A +3 bonus will be more effective overall than a +1d6 roll, always.

Can I touch this up a bit?

A +3 bonus will be more effective than a +1d6 roll, on 1 out of 3 rolls.