From other prison/RPG articles I've read, this seems to be the standard solution. Not really surprising, since this is also the solution TSR used in the Holmes set when they couldn't get polyhedral dice for a while.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Design Challenge: prison-playable RPG rules
- Thread starter Janx
- Start date
Awhile ago I found an old Holmes basic D&D box set, which still had an uncut sheet of chits with numbers on them to simulate dice.
I used to be a corrections officer/prison guard, and, at least in Florida, any kind of dice are contraband, however a playing cards are not.
As a gamer I worked this out long ago
separate cards into 2 piles: ace-10, and face cards
d4: draw any pile hearts=1 diamonds=2 clubs=3 spades=4
d6: draw face card pile: red jack/queen/king= 1/2/3 Black=4/5/6
d8: draw from numbered pile, discard 9 & 10 or maybe suit + high/low modifier based on card number
d10: Draw numbered pile
d12: cries itself softly to sleep
d20: draw numbered pile red= 1-10, black 11-20
As a gamer I worked this out long ago
separate cards into 2 piles: ace-10, and face cards
d4: draw any pile hearts=1 diamonds=2 clubs=3 spades=4
d6: draw face card pile: red jack/queen/king= 1/2/3 Black=4/5/6
d8: draw from numbered pile, discard 9 & 10 or maybe suit + high/low modifier based on card number
d10: Draw numbered pile
d12: cries itself softly to sleep
d20: draw numbered pile red= 1-10, black 11-20
jdrakeh
Front Range Warlock
On Puget Sound
First Post
The "throw 20 2-sided objects and count the heads" systems does not get you a d20 roll. It gets you a pronounced bell curve. The reason is that each of the 20 objects is discrete, even though we are lumping them together to count, so there are more combinations possible for values near the middle of the range. Simplifying to 4 chits rather than 20 for space and brevity, here are all the possible rolls:
0000=0
0001=1
0010=1
0100=1
1000=1
0011=2
0101=2
1001=2
0110=2
1010=2
1100=2
0111=3
1011=3
1101=3
1110=3
1111=4
simulating a 16-sided die with one 0, four 1s, six 2s, four 3s and one 4.
It's still a valid random number generator, but its peculiarities need to be taken into account when designing a system.
0000=0
0001=1
0010=1
0100=1
1000=1
0011=2
0101=2
1001=2
0110=2
1010=2
1100=2
0111=3
1011=3
1101=3
1110=3
1111=4
simulating a 16-sided die with one 0, four 1s, six 2s, four 3s and one 4.
It's still a valid random number generator, but its peculiarities need to be taken into account when designing a system.
in order to keep it simple, i'd standardize the randomization to one type of "die" size. If I used a deck of cards, It would be 1d13 (2 through Ace) or 1d52 (harder to convert to numbers, but easy to resolve who wins as suits win by alphabetical rank)
thus far, deck of cards, rock/paper/scissors, and double-pick-a-number seem the lightest of randomizers
I can't say how good/complex the system would be. But as a concept it has some merit in proving how little system you need, if you couldn't have what we take for granted.
thus far, deck of cards, rock/paper/scissors, and double-pick-a-number seem the lightest of randomizers
I can't say how good/complex the system would be. But as a concept it has some merit in proving how little system you need, if you couldn't have what we take for granted.
I agree (and even mentioned there may be stat problems with it). I probably wouldn't use it for a d20, where that bell curve would be more pronounced, as well as more tedious to count.
But for a d6, it may be good enough. Certainly not much worse than 2d6's curving versus 1d12
Last edited:
Voadam
Legend
This seems the best solution if they can have their own cards and such are not banned as gambling devices.
Here's the result distribution in a table"
x = die size
P1 = first player's choice of number between 1 and x
P2 = second player's choice of number between 1 and x
result = P1 + P2
if result > x, result = result - x
here's a combination table to test it out (the top row is the P1 axis, the left column is the P2 axis)
__:_1_2_3_4_5_6
=============
_1:_2_3_4_5_6_1
_2:_3_4_5_6_1_2
_3:_4_5_6_1_2_3
_4:_5_6_1_2_3_4
_5:_6_1_2_3_4_5
_6:_1_2_3_4_5_6
Pawsplay's method seems valid and statistically balanced. It is certainly better than the absolute value method I concocted just now. A player has no bias of control over the result for any given choice.
and it is diceless, yet the math remains simple. nice. One could use cards (each players chooses a numbered card from their personal deck), rather than writing it down. less writing work, especially if paper or pencil is limited.
This might be a reasonable system for a larp, actually...
continuing on with random rule ideas....
I'd try to reduce dice rolling, give how tedious it might be (not as simple as pick up 5d6 and roll a fireball).
so with that in mind, I might try the following for an attack with damage included mechanic:
Written assuming a d6 for all dice rolls, though really, it doesn't matter. I also assume stats range from 1 to 6 (or whatever die size we're using)
AC = targets DEXx2
attacker rolls 1d6 + modifier (modifer is STR for melee, DEX for ranged)
if result > AC, it's a hit. Damage = result - AC
This could generate a fairly high damage level, though at most, it should be no more than 10 (AC 2 - 12 result (rolled 6 + 6 modifier)
Assuming stats are allowed to go higher at higher levels, you'd also assume AC would scale up as well for level appropriate challenges
One might also make weapons interesting, by making them give a bonus to damage, or to-hit, rather than having a specific damage dice
thus, small weapons might be +0 damage, medium would be +1 damage, etc.
By not making equipment be too important, we reduce the documentation needed. No pages of equipment needed with varying weights and damages...
I'm also putting emphasis on the DEX stat (which is really the AC stat) that a PC is hard to hit, because they put points in it. Not because of the gear they bought.
I reckon I could make it so armor does damage reduction (and weapons do damage increase), but stats directly affect AC to to-hit
At this stage, I think a PC could have stats, HP, AC and be able to fight a monster with 1 attack per round. I think he'd get better as he advanced in levels, being harder to hit, doing more damage, or taking more hits (just like D&D). In simple terms, plain combat is done.
I think all the sneaky stuff would be handled by DEX checks set against a DC (similar to current D&D). 11=hard, 9=tough, 6= average, 3=easy for DCs might be a good starting point. Pretty much any "skill" or "Stat" challenge would be handled this way.
Next on the list is magic...
Magic is the toughest, because it usually calls for more complex effects. Designing a simple math formula for damage inflicting spells would be fairly simple, and easy to remember how those type spells work. What's harder is the "weird" stuff that can be quite varied, as magic gets used to solve lots of problems.
Since fighter types can do damage every round, I have no problem with wizards doing similar. Since magic usually can affect multiple targets, I might just specify that wizards get to divide their damage result across all their targets. Thus, they don't do "more" per round, but they can hit more people. Or at be able to build up over a couple of rounds, for a bigger effect.
I have a tendency to design the comabt mechanics first, with an eye towards other uses. Then I create out the other parts, following the same pattern combat fleshed out. So I suspect I'm going to ponder damage-inflicting spells and casting next...
I'd try to reduce dice rolling, give how tedious it might be (not as simple as pick up 5d6 and roll a fireball).
so with that in mind, I might try the following for an attack with damage included mechanic:
Written assuming a d6 for all dice rolls, though really, it doesn't matter. I also assume stats range from 1 to 6 (or whatever die size we're using)
AC = targets DEXx2
attacker rolls 1d6 + modifier (modifer is STR for melee, DEX for ranged)
if result > AC, it's a hit. Damage = result - AC
This could generate a fairly high damage level, though at most, it should be no more than 10 (AC 2 - 12 result (rolled 6 + 6 modifier)
Assuming stats are allowed to go higher at higher levels, you'd also assume AC would scale up as well for level appropriate challenges
One might also make weapons interesting, by making them give a bonus to damage, or to-hit, rather than having a specific damage dice
thus, small weapons might be +0 damage, medium would be +1 damage, etc.
By not making equipment be too important, we reduce the documentation needed. No pages of equipment needed with varying weights and damages...
I'm also putting emphasis on the DEX stat (which is really the AC stat) that a PC is hard to hit, because they put points in it. Not because of the gear they bought.
I reckon I could make it so armor does damage reduction (and weapons do damage increase), but stats directly affect AC to to-hit
At this stage, I think a PC could have stats, HP, AC and be able to fight a monster with 1 attack per round. I think he'd get better as he advanced in levels, being harder to hit, doing more damage, or taking more hits (just like D&D). In simple terms, plain combat is done.
I think all the sneaky stuff would be handled by DEX checks set against a DC (similar to current D&D). 11=hard, 9=tough, 6= average, 3=easy for DCs might be a good starting point. Pretty much any "skill" or "Stat" challenge would be handled this way.
Next on the list is magic...
Magic is the toughest, because it usually calls for more complex effects. Designing a simple math formula for damage inflicting spells would be fairly simple, and easy to remember how those type spells work. What's harder is the "weird" stuff that can be quite varied, as magic gets used to solve lots of problems.
Since fighter types can do damage every round, I have no problem with wizards doing similar. Since magic usually can affect multiple targets, I might just specify that wizards get to divide their damage result across all their targets. Thus, they don't do "more" per round, but they can hit more people. Or at be able to build up over a couple of rounds, for a bigger effect.
I have a tendency to design the comabt mechanics first, with an eye towards other uses. Then I create out the other parts, following the same pattern combat fleshed out. So I suspect I'm going to ponder damage-inflicting spells and casting next...
