Dice pool game design woes

[mamba]

So it's still not right. And if the single die row is wrong, they probably all are.

it is right, while it explodes once, the second roll only has a 50% chance to add a point. That is why the 16.666 turns into 8.333

 

[aramis erak]

Haivng played at least a dozen (only 3 being WoD)...

if you're going count successes, WoD's method (explode on 10 if skilled, granting an extra die) seems pretty easy.

Playtesting the current Robotech (we dropped out), all of my players hated the dice mechanic, where 2×4's equaled a success, 1×5 was a success, and a 6 was 2 successes. I don't know if that continued on into release. They flat out said "No more" when they found out that modifiers could make 4's a full success and 5's two, or make 4's nothing, 5's half, and 6's 1 success... THey didn't like 4 result states, let alone modifying those. It also didn't come to intutiveness.

excepting symbolic pools (FFG, proper Modiphius effect dice), having more than 3 states for a die is way too many, unless some of them are pretty mnemonic...

FFG's effect dice are sufficiently mnemonic for me
1-2 result points = roll
5 and 6 are 1 and a special
mediocre dice (3-4) get nothing.

My favorite count success d6 dicepool is that of Arrowflight 1e. stat dice, rolling for skill or less. if 3 or more are 1's, roll another full pool's worth and add. If more than half the dice roll 6's, and the action fails, it's a fumble. Difficulties modify skill; when the TN goes over 5, the TN stays 5, but the difference from counted and 5 is a number of bonus successes gained as long as at least one non-6 is rolled.
The att range is roughly 2-6 with occasional 7s or 8's, skills start 0-4, no unskilled penalty. It's also not available in PDF... 2E uses a 2d6< (Stat+skill) with the same att and skill ranges...

 

[aramis erak]

This calculates 6s adding an additional die.

AnyDice

AnyDice is an advanced dice probability calculator, available online. It is created with roleplaying games in mind.

anydice.com

Not exactly; it limits the iterations and presents only a limited precision result, thus providing a pretty good approximation.

And yes, the pun was calculated.

Still, it's one of the better tools.

 

[soviet]

Instead of pitching a dice pool against a fixed target, you could instead pitch dice pool against dice pool. If each dice represents a 50% chance, then doubling the DC should provide the right number of dice for this new method (ie the second set of dice were the ones that failed). This removes the hard ceiling on which rolls can succeed, although the probabilities will mostly enforce the same outcome it won't be guaranteed.

 

[Morrus]

Instead of pitching a dice pool against a fixed target, you could instead pitch dice pool against dice pool.

Well yes, I mentioned opposed rolls in my OP.

 

[aramis erak]

Instead of pitching a dice pool against a fixed target, you could instead pitch dice pool against dice pool. If each dice represents a 50% chance, then doubling the DC should provide the right number of dice for this new method (ie the second set of dice were the ones that failed). This removes the hard ceiling on which rolls can succeed, although the probabilities will mostly enforce the same outcome it won't be guaranteed.

which increases roll-handling time and reduces reliability of results, IE, more swingy.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Instead of pitching a dice pool against a fixed target, you could instead pitch dice pool against dice pool.

that's exactly what I do in the link I provided upthread. I like it a lot better in practice compared to just counting successes. It makes things more swinging and unpredictable, which I like.