Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Content

Hey Folks! Matt Colville here, time to talk about the latest refinement to our core die roll! WOO! Just like everything else, some of y’all will like it, some won’t, and there’ll be every reaction in-between. But it’s working for us so far, we’ve run games internally with it, the testers have had it for a while and based on the feedback we’re getting this seems like a good time to talk about it.

When Last We Left Our Heroes…

You folks got the first Patreon Playtest Packet a while ago and your responses were SUPER useful. That should be obvious, it’s the reason we send out playtest packets, but it bears repeating. So thank you all for the time you took to read it, play it (in some cases several times!) and log your results. It will make the game better. And, should the game grow an audience and people are still playing it years from now, you’ll be able to say “Man I remember when it worked like THIS….”

I think James has already said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating here. We use feedback to inform development. The feedback is not in charge. 😀 For a lot of reasons, including; people do not all agree about which parts of the game are good or fun or even comprehensible. I’ve written a lot of rulebooks, I’ve read a lot of rulebooks and I think it’s impossible to write a rulebook that literally everyone understands perfectly the first time they read it. Sometimes, it’s only after you play the game once or twice that a rule finally makes sense. It’s weird, but that’s the way it is.

Anyway, the feedback was wide-ranging but for this post we’re just talking about the core 2d6+X die roll. Oh, and lots of people (including us!) challenged the idea of everyone always adding the same +x to the roll. We talked about that a LOT. Why not just cut that +X? Well, this isn’t a post about that, but the shorthand answers are: player psychology and math. Rolling a 2 on 2d6 feels worse than rolling a 2 when you know you get to add +3 or whatever. Also that +X gives us a little cushion that makes the math work better for rolls with a bane. It also makes leveling up easy! When one characteristic improves, it improves a bunch of your stats instead of you having to track each improvement with a different modifier.

What Folks Liked

Folks just like rolling 2d6. Feels good. Rolling a single die can be pretty brutal. Imagine regular d20 Fantasy, just without the d20 attack roll. You are just as likely to roll a 1 as a 6 even though one of those results is SIX TIMES greater than the other! Surely that should mean it’s at least a LITTLE less likely to come up?? And from this we get the swingyness that I believe contributes to Slog.

And building a dice POOL takes time and reading the results takes time and that’s fine if you’re only making a few rolls per session, but we don’t expect a fight with a monster to resolve in a single die roll, so 2d6 is sort of the sweet spot here.

Folks liked the crit! That is pretty much a universal positive. Getting an extra action (as opposed to just bonus damage) gives the players way more opportunities to do cool stuff, including kibitz and strategize about what they SHOULD do and that furthers the sense of teamwork!

No one misses the attack roll! HUGE surprise! 😀 This is one of those things I think we already knew just from our own internal testing, but it’s nice knowing that everyone else feels the same way.

What Folks Didn’t Like

Folks really, really didn’t like everyone doing basically the same damage. We thought letting Kits, which determine which weapons your character can use, would let us differentiate between heroes? Heavy weapon kits = big damage bonus, light weapons kits, not so much.

But it wasn’t enough. It’s not even that it wasn’t enough, it just didn’t feel good. It was a sticky spot for us as designers because we couldn’t let damage bonuses overwhelm the 2d6 roll, otherwise you’re really just doing X damage plus 2d6. That didn’t leave us a lot of room to vary Kit damage bonuses.

We tried a version of the game where every attack used a different damage die, like a d8 for medium weapons and a d6 for a psionic power, but is made everything worse. Rolling a 1 on 1d8, felt really bad when it was the only thing you did on your turn. Worse than rolling 2 on 2d6 for reasons that are entirely down to player psychology. AND we got the crazy swingyness back that we thought we’d solved..

Really the problem, as I see it, was: we threw out the attack roll and went with 2d6, and those two things became conflated in our, at least my, mind. So it seemed like we had something and could move on. But those are two different things! Obviously! No attack roll? A+. Everyone doing 2d6+x damage? Just wasn’t gonna fly. And we feel the same way! Characters should be doing different damage based on stuff like; are they in melee or at range? Are they hard to kill or squishy? Etc… And it can’t be subtle. It’s not enough that different characters are technically doing different damage, they have to feel like they're doing different damage in the moment.

This Wicket Seems Sticky

You add up all that feedback and you get a thorny problem.

People like No Attack Roll.

People liked 2d6.

They liked the crit on a 12. And we couldn’t just switch to different weapons using different damage dice. Because in the absence of an attack roll, which is normally where the crit lives, just saying “well, if you roll max damage (like an 8 on 1d8), then THAT’S the crit!”

Well, you already DID max damage! You already GOT the best result. Making that the crit would REALLY make the game swingy. Way more swingy than the already-quite-swingy D20 Fantasy.

We thought about TONS of other crit options and tested several, but they all had flaws including just “feels weird.” We talked about throwing out the crit! But people loved our crit!

James and I met and talked all this out, and we could not think of a good solution. The real problem, the fundamental problem was: how could we let everyone roll 2d6, keep the crit, AND differentiate damage rolls? Have our cake and eat it too.

The Power Roll

James got there before me. I wrote a long message in our discord laying out all of the above, just trying to define the problem and sum over everything we knew and had learned.

I woke up the next day to an equally long message from James in which he proposed the following.

Your roll, your 2D6+x roll, is the input to a chart and the chart tells you what happens.

You, reading this, are probably imagining something way more complicated than what James was proposing. I immediately (and with undisguised glee) shouted “Like Rolemaster!” An RPG I quite liked. But I knew he didn’t mean that.

He referenced another indie RPG (Apocalypse World) that has a mechanic like this. He wasn’t proposing we use that mechanic, he didn’t think it would work for our game, but it was an example of an RPG that did something like this. And therefore could serve as a proof of concept that the idea is not fundamentally flawed in some way. Might not be right for us, but could work.

By the end of his post–you could see him working it out as he went–he had refined the idea down to the following. This is a sample heroic ability.

James was proposing every combat ability your character has, so not general abilities like the Talent’s Telepathy, would include a chart like this. We would all be rolling the same 2d6, but we could each have very different characters with different weapons with very different, appropriately different, damage results.  Under this model, your choice of kit would modify this chart.

Now, you might not recognize this. James didn’t. But I did! This is the same idea from one of my favorite beer-and-pretzel card games. Epic Spell Battles!!

Epic Spell Battles, aka Epic Spell Wars of the Battle Wizards: Duel At Skullfyre Mountain, is a card game where you “build” spells out of up to three cards from your hand. Each spell has a Subject, a Quality, and a Destination. You can use these in any combination to create unique (not literally but you get the idea) spells.

It was awesome and funny for me to see James pitch this because I thought, I really believed, we could steal casting spells like this for the MCDM RPG Wizard/Mage. Sort of the kind of thing Ars Magica implies. The fact that a card game does this tricked me into thinking WE could do it, but I couldn’t make it work. We already know too much about our game, any new system has to serve the existing masters and I couldn’t get this idea to check all the boxes we needed. So I laughed out loud to see some design from it show up. Just not the design I was trying to steal!

As a fan of this game, I was excited. And as soon as I started thinking about how we could do this, I got really excited. “This is a really powerful idea,” I said. There was a TON of stuff we could hang on it.

But first, having played Epic Spell Battles, I said “The chart needs to be the same for every power and every character.” That was something I noticed, playing ESB. The chart is always 1-4, 5-9, 10+. The results on the right are all different and idiosyncratic, but the numbers on the left are always the same. And I think I know why.

It means every time someone rolls? Everyone at the table knows what the numbers on the chart say, even if they can’t actually read the card because they’re sitting too far away. So they always know, if you roll a 9? EVERYONE at the table knows you almost got the best result. That has a huge impact on play. The results can and should be different and unique. But the numbers on the left of the chart should always be the same. “I dunno even know what your power does, but I see you rolled a 10, so I know you got the best result!” Now I’m anticipating the worst. Literally!

It also helps a lot with what we call the Cognitive Load. How much shit is the average player expected to be able to hold in their head? If every ability in the game could have unique ranges? Players and Directors would go insane. There’d be no real way to know “Is that good?” just looking at the dice. Now, obviously the cognitive load is even lower if the 2d6 roll was just…the damage you did, but we tried that and it led here!

I can’t tell you how many problems this solved. Using 2D6 as the damage roll meant we had to inflate everyone’s HP up to what seemed like stupid high levels to people. That didn’t bother us, it’s all relative, fights would play out the same way, but it sure felt weird. Well, folks would get used to that, there is precedent, but this lets us bring things back to normal.

As soon as I saw what James had posted, my brain started fizzing. I immediately, that day, prototyped the Elementalist (we’ll talk about that next post probably) using the new Power Chart. I’d already been working on the Elementalist but this was what I needed to really get excited by it. I saw ENORMOUS possibilities for this.

You could have a spell where the effect was always the same, but the chart sets the Target Number to resist! Or, the spell always does the same damage, but the results tell you how big the area is!

You could have kits that did MORE damage when you rolled badly! 😀 I dunno if that’s a GOOD idea, but it could be cool! You could have magic items that added an effect to ALL your abilities, at the 10+ level. Or artifacts that added a 13+ level to your existing powers! I can’t even put all the idea and possibilities here. There’s too many.

After testing this a few times with different people, we felt like it was working well. But we knew there were challenges with this solution. It was powerful and exciting and, we thought, fun, but it wasn’t perfect.

Known Problems and Challenges

You, reading this, have already thought of everything I’m about to say. EVERY heroic ability on your sheet has a whole CHART? Even a tiny little chart is still a LOT! Yep. That’s suboptimal. But we think what it gets us is worth it.

For some players, adding a step? Roll + look up the result, vs the roll IS the result? Feels like a lot. But most folks haven’t had any issue with it and having played dozens of games of Epic Spell Battles, I think it’s fine. The reality is, the three results are always just different versions of the same thing. Typically something like…

Some Fire. Better than nothing!

A Goodly Amount of Fire. Woo!

A Lot of Fire! And something cool happens!

Always fire! Only question is; how much? It’s never three unrelated results.

Requiring every heroic ability to have a three line chart could cause the character sheet to become unwieldy, but we have some control there. We could reduce the number of abilities for one thing, which seems reasonable considering each ability now has three results.

As we played it, I realized what we’d done. We’d sort of taken the entire experience of d20 Fantasy and baked it into one roll, without the null result. 2-6 is “A bad turn.” Except not anywhere near AS bad as “I miss, next.” Because remember, you can hit in d20 fantasy AND have a bad turn just because you roll a 1 on the damage die! Here, we have precise control over what counts as a bad turn. You’re always going to make progress, just: how much?

You also have a Good Turn result, a REALLY good turn result, AND we still have the crit on a natural 12!

We started to think…maybe skills should use this too! I think most people want a range of results rather than the Boolean pass/fail results and this lets us have a range of successes for any skill roll. We’ve already started on that.

That’s It!

Is this the final iteration of the Core Die Roll? Ah, probably! We think it’s so powerful, it’s now our job to make it work, file off any edges. We spent a lot of time dialing in the actual ranges. Should it be 2-4? 2-7? That kind of thing. And that may get refined as we go. Should there be a fourth tier? Probably not, we can let magic items and stuff create those exceptions, or not if it’s a bad idea.

But I think we’re committed to making this work. It worked great in our internal tests and really…it did what I always say the rules need to do. It worked and got out of the way. With maybe like one exception across several tests? No one even commented on the chart. It just worked. People loved the RESULTS!

In other words, this chart isn’t what will make the game fun. It’s what we do with it. It’s everything else.

Next post? Probably you’ll get to meet The Elementalist!

Comments

Victor Frunza

Love this! Also like the potential of balancing simplicity knowing you have 3 states of every action instead of a range. Excited to see how this evolves.

Katze

Ive been thinking since I started following the patreon that this game's cinematic pillar would lend itself really well to PbtA design! Would love to see this for skills, and hugely excited by this change On that note, it might be interesting to see some lower-end rolls have something like a mixed success, where there's a cost in addition to the damage. But that obviously might not fit for most abilities

Matthew

Hmm… PbtA and 4E having a baby for the MCDM RPG makes me SO curious. Like Matt said, I think there’s the potential for something really powerful there, I just hope it doesn’t become too unwieldy all put together. I worry what a 10th level character sheet will look like in this system 😅

sklogw

I imagine in the final layouting, the three lines can be presented pretty concisely, even without the number ranges when they're the same for everyone. Sounds like a cool solution, especially with the potential for expanding it, as you've hinted at!

Sami U Khan

Love the potential for the chart and all the awesome variability it can introduce! Also agree with Katze above that it will be really interesting to see if the concept of mixed successes would show up in the chart, especially for skills.

mcdm

Ah, we are also worried about that. But in meetings we've come up with a LOT of ways to keep things from getting unwieldy. We just don't know which ones are right. I mean, we were worried about that way before we came up with the Power Roll! :D -MCDM

Tom W

I have been so excited to see what the elementalist would look like mechanically. Genuinely losing my mind out of curiosity. I am so damn pumped for this game, I keep bringing it up with my group every week lol

Duncan Forster

Using this on skills has me intrigued. I really like 'I pass, and...; I pass, but...; I fail; but...; I fail, and...' in the negotiation part of the game. A similar thing could be implemented for skills with this idea.

Oscar Hernandez

I've always really liked the clean look of a PbtA "move" where the "look-up chart" is folded into the text of the ability. On a 10+, do great thing; on a 7-9, do good thing; on a 6-, do decent-bad thing. It just works! But I worry about the bounding effect of modifiers getting too big making the chart pointless. If you have a +5 to your roll, you'll basically always have the top-end effect, right?

HunterIV4

Well, great, you just solved like 90% of the issues I had with the 2d6 roll system. I've mentioned this before, but I'm a big fan of PF2e, and one thing that it does well is the "four degrees of success" which sort of work this way. But this system is arguably better as there's no real null result, so you basically have "3 degrees of success (minus crit fail)", which makes more sense in the context of how you are designing this game. In particular, I didn't like the static TN rolls and 100% success rate for various non-damage effects, nor the possibility of doing nothing but damage on an ability primarily there for the debuff utility. This system lets you actually make abilities that have a more interesting spread than pass/fail. Having 3 options for skills also adds a lot more variety and possibility. I like the idea of static ranges and hope that they are simply named categories (PF2e uses crit fail, fail, success, and crit success, which won't work here but means that abilities generally have explanations for each range). In particular, again going to PF2e, I love how that game handles debuffs. With spells, you typically have 4 options on saving throws...if they get a crit success, nothing happens (the removed null result), but even on a success there is a minor debuff, with a fail getting a more severe (but manageable) effect, and finally a "crit fail" effect that is frequently quite debilitating. For example, you could have a "tangle" type ability that does -5' move on low roll, -10' and prevents strides on medium roll, and immobilize on high roll, which could make control characters a lot more dynamic. The TN could also be different for each level, giving the enemy a chance to defend but making a high roll harder to resist. I think this is a great change, thanks for sharing!

Matthew

Oh it’s definitely still an avenue worth exploring; it allows for so many possibilities, which is really exciting! I wish the team the best of luck in navigating those waters

Mallory Glover

I totally see the potential for this! Curious to see how it will feel playing it at the table as I imagine it will be slightly clunkier in-person with printed sheets vs. online for the reasons laid out here. We mostly play online, so I can see a world where most of the clunkiness is handled by whichever VTT you’re playing in. Very interesting and exciting overall though!

Matthew

I can definitely see potential for certain abilities to have a “Choose One” effect for lower rolls, but the best result gets you everything

mcdm

The 6 or less, 7-9, and 10+ aren't necessarily the ranges here. We've tested a few different ones. Also, we're figuring out how you level over time. It may be that your bonuses to these rolls don't dramatically increase, but their EFFECTS and DAMAGE do as you level. Lots of options. -James

Wrel

You already mentioned this, but the extra lookup is a major hesitation from where I'm sitting. It'll jive with some tables, but probably not with the folks I usually game with. Hope it turns out well though, interested to hear the feedback when it's playtested more.

Chris Comstock

Every time a Patreon post points to really elegant solutions like this emerging from playtests and development, the chafing I feel from the LACK of elegant solutions in D&D becomes a little more pronounced.

Caspar Rahm

Having a lookup chart sounded a bit slow and unwieldy to me at first but having the ranges be the same for all abilities sounds very intuitive and the added benefit of being able to have anything (damage, range etc) in the results column is very exciting!

Kuroshi

Damn am I excited to get my hands on this. My minds sprinting off in every direction at once with ideas. This also seems like the right course for making skill checks more interesting than they tend to be in d20 games (some have also solved that by doing a similar levels of success type thing).

Guillaume TROUVÉ

I just love the power roll! I maybe one of the few missing the attack roll to hit. I live the idea of a bad success or a great success. It makes the roll fun, and I like rolling dice with fear in my guts :)

Elliott

This is an incredibly exciting update! The PbtA style trinary result is SO powerful as a design tool. I can't wait to see how this design progresses and all the crazy abilities y'all come up with using this system!

Jan Plewa

I really like the idea of the table improving instead of the modifier (that always bugged me in pbta)! Now I can even imagine using it for skills!!!

John Gard

This is a great idea. Stepped results also gives you the power of changing some +x abilities into +step abilities, which could make them feel a lot more powerful. "Burn 5 resources and you improve your next result by a step" gives me a better feeling than "Burn 5 resources and you do 2 more damage". Increasing by a step means I know exactly what I'm getting, whereas I may not know if a +2 will move the needle much.

Matthew Staunton

Really feeling how unchained the development of this game is from D&D now! Love the degrees of success design, makes me imagine every character is going to be super unique which is great as well

Kyle Fukui

I'm feeling a touch of war gaming starting to show its head a bit, but that's not a negative at all. I play 40k and Kill Team, so my brain is already pretty well accustomed to rolling and looking up the effect based on the result. This is a great way to address different effectiveness scalings for what different classes are good at, I'm excited to see the way the design comes together with class abilities and magic.

Joseph Davis

This is such a cool application of that design. Playing battle wizards is always super enjoyable and I'm very excited for the design possibilities this opens for canon and for home brew.

Antan Karmola

It's funny, this feels almost like coming back around to funky dice but by look-up table instead of dice and with more possibilities!

Wesley Shorey

I'm pretty unsure how I feel about this... but I'm someone who only had trouble with the "same-y-ness" of the attack rolls while on the director's side of the screen, so this feels a bit like attacking a hornet's nest with a tank to me. Imagining trying to explain this to players who have only played d20 fantasy and aren't into board/card games is already making me stressed. The idea of grades of rider effect is really nice, but coming at the cost of total number of abilities seems steep to me. I look forward to the chance to playtest this though, especially as it seems to be getting a really positive reception internally. Cheers for the post!

Seth Lang

You guys never cease to amaze with the cool ideas that you come up with, can't wait to try it out.

JJGYET

My thoughts on this: how will it handle leveling up/getting more powerful. Feel kinda crud if my cool level 10 abilities had the same chance to do meh/good/great as my level 1 abilities. Vs if my level 10 abilities had higher numbers on the left compared to my level 1 abilities and now I can almost always max my level 1s and my level 10s are the ones that swing a bit. Or something to that effect.

David L

Definitely sounds like a cool design to me. I like the possibility of the power roles giving an extra lever to work with for magic-item design; like if normal results are always Okay/Good/Great, maybe a cursed weapon gives Bad/Good/Excellent results or only Okay/Great Results. Seems like a lot of fun possibilities. Just as long as monsters don't get too much more complicated as a result

Ricardo

I like this quite a bit actually. The fact that it's always the same effect no matter what result you get on the die means this doesn't have to be a table. This can be a single line. Whatever range you guys come up with can be added once to the rulebook and just become a little "Power Icon" in the descriptions later. The value in front of that icon could be as simple as * - 5, 7, 10. In the description of the ability you just reference the "Power Icon" in the middle of the description, like: "Deals * fire damage" And you just know that * means one of the three values at the bottom of the description depending on what you get on the dice. I have no idea how you guys want to implement this of course, but I'm sure once well formatted this is actually very simple to conceptualize and read.

Matt

I did not think about this idea at all and I absolutely love what you're saying here

Roosevelt Cooper

I actually like this idea a lot! This solves one problem that D20 games that require separate attack and damage rolls have. You make an awesome attack roll, even a natural 20. Then you bomb the damage roll and it's a big let down. With this you know if that one roll is good it's going to be something really cool. You might not know what that cool thing is if you don't know the kit but your expectations at least are more in line with the reality.

Vast

Great work James this sounds fun

Kill Your Masters

This is the first thing in this game that I disagree with. You should not reduce the amount of abilities that a character has in favor of different amounts of damage done. Effects are what make the game interesting. If the characters have fewer effects to use that will by default make the game less interesting. Why can’t you have both good ideas in the game? We don’t need to be talked down to as players or DM’s, that’s the mistake that fifth edition made.

John Gard

Could be even better if non-numerical effects are sprinkled into step levels. Assume I have the ability to upgrade the step on my abilities by spending resources. Then assume some of my abilities just do a lot of damage, and some do less damage but can get kicker effects with higher rolls. I'm having a hard time putting this into text without examples, so I'm using these horribly-balanced abilities to explain my thoughts: Heavy Hitter Distance: Melee Target: 1 creature 2-6 Damage 5 7-9 Damage 7 10+ Damage 9 Leonidas Kick Distance: Melee Target: 1 creature 2-6 Damage 2 7-9 Damage 4 and slide the target up to 1 square 10+ Damage 6 and slide target up to 2 squares Effect: Knock a target prone Now I'm going to need to strategically spend my resource to increase the step of the correct ability at the correct time to get the best results. Maybe the enemy is bloodied, so I use all the rage and momentum I've been saving up all battle to do as much damage as possible with my Heavy Hitter. Or... maybe the enemy is in perfect position to be knocked into melee range of my ally, but I need to roll a 10+ because I need both squares of movement. Crap, rolled a 9. With a roar I pull out that little extra that I've been reserving all battle to set up my friend for a cool moment by knocking the enemy on their butt right at my friend's feet.

Nick Enquist

So I became a patron just to see “how the sausage is made” as game design is becoming a passion of mine. I really appreciate all the posts because I love seeing the process. This direction reminds me of a game called Land of Eem I’ve been obsessed with lately. In that game you roll a d12 and based on the number rolled a result happens. (It’s definitely not a tactical combat game, but it’s fairy brutal). What I noticed with that design is a level of elegance. Everyone knows what happens when you roll a 6 as opposed to a 12 or a 1. And as you play more frequently that resolution chart becomes more second nature. I could definitely see people being overwhelmed by the level options and results, but I think understanding the chart will lead to a faster game at the table.

Caleb Fasnacht

I can see this idea working, and I can also see it being a bit too much. I love designs that makes that thing you're doing now more powerful when you do it again at high levels, and, I think that can facilitate that really nicely. I'm one of those assholes who accidentally gives suggestions when I get excited (which I can't apologize enough for. I've disrespected you greatly in this way, and you deserve better.), so I'm going to not do that. But I think this is the right track for the game to go, and I'm excited to see what kind of ideas y'all come up with to make it work.

DwhyDx

Like many, my first thought was how this could get unwieldy, and I worried about the cognitive load of looking up a chart for every roll. But then I realized the main audience is used to rolling twice for attack and damage anyway, so it should still be a simpler turn than a comparable d20 fantasy turn. Rolling and checking a chart I suspect is easier on a player than rolling twice.

Brandon

I like that you're addressing everything having the same damage. However.. I don't understand what the point is of a normal distribution roll (ie 2d6) if it just points to a lookup table, other than to be different from 5e. You could get the exact (or near enough) probabilities by rolling a d20 and having the medium effect range be the largest. I guess I also don't understand why you don't just change the die size, but keep it normalized by rolling 2 dice (ie things do 2d4, 2d6, 2d8, or 2d10 etc damage). Sure that would change the crit chance for each roll, but that actually seems like nice flavor and a balancing tradeoff for doing considerably more damage at higher die rolls. So my rogue might only do 2d4 with his dagger, but he's much more likely to crit (roll double 4s) than your Greataxe attack. If you don't like that crits aren't always the same numbers across die sizes, then just make snake eyes the crit. This gives you a much wider range of results than just 3 different damage possibilities. Also, why not both? Have most abilities use damage dice, but some use a single die with lookup tables for the effects? Single die means for sure its a lookup table. I don't think this would be too confusing for users, esp since overall it means fewer lookups.

Robin Baggett

Love Epic Spell Wars! Having a universal range that every player knows is a great idea (reminds me of PBtA). This feels like a really interesting way to balance the 2d6 having meaning while also not just equating to damage. I'm interested to see how this evolves.

RJ Ehlert

You could make bonuses to the 2d6 power roll very rare and very small. You could then separately give increased damage without the weighted top-end effect.

Brandon

I wouldn't worry personally about requiring too many dice, since every table I've been at has had an overabundance of dice, and you can of course sell your own dice bundles, with everything needed. If you really want you can keep everything d6 but add on more d6's for more damage, but less chance to crit. > They liked the crit on a 12. And we couldn’t just switch to different weapons using different damage dice. Because in the absence of an attack roll, which is normally where the crit lives, just saying “well, if you roll max damage (like an 8 on 1d8), then THAT’S the crit!” > Well, you already DID max damage! You already GOT the best result. Making that the crit would REALLY make the game swingy. Way more swingy than the already-quite-swingy D20 Fantasy. Isn't that already how it works with crit on a 12? I'd also note that using a d20 (or any other single die) for the lookup makes the percentages more transparent/legible. Whats the probability of rolling 4-7 on a 2d6? Idk.. I'd have to really think about that. Whats the probability of rolling 4-7 on a d20? Easy, 5% * 4 = 20%.

Arthur_OL

This looks really cool and opens up some great options. Just wondering, would boons and banes still work the same way and apply to the 2d6 roll, or would they apply to the damage/outcomes on the right side of the chart?

Nick Reyes

This is such a cool and powerful system, and reminds me a lot of the 2015 Strike! rpg, which took 4E style combat and merged it with a tabled result resolution system to give it a narrative resolution system both in and out of combat (actually mixed 4E, PBTA, and Burning Wheel). I realize y'all don't want to be influenced by other games too much, but I'm really encouraged by this development because Strike! is probably my favorite game ever, and I really love how elegantly integrated the in and out of combat systems use the same resolution mechanic to give you both interesting tactical combat and easy mixed result style narrative play.

Tithann

I will confess that I don't have the current rules firmly implanted in my head, but this new (exciting) development leaves me with one question : how does it interact with boon/bane die and Impact die ? Is Impact die still a thing ?

Ryan Brutz

I was kinda thinking the same thing. What if there was a 4th tier that was 15+ or something that is impossible to attain in the first couple of levels and then once your "proficiency bonus" was high enough due to leveling, you were able to hit that top tier.

Ryan Brutz

The biggest issue that I had with funky dice is that I couldn't match my funky dice with my other dice.

George_APOG

I like this a lot. Also seems like a good way to sell cards for classes. If a player doesn't want to have this all on a sheet they could have playing cards for their abilities for reference instead.

Junk Knight

Wow... i'm surprised the power roll is something you folks consider, because i use a similar mechanic in my own mini RPG. It's basically a single d6 for damage rolls with the faces 1L, 2L, 3L, 4M, 5M and 6H (the numbers are used in conjunction with the other d6 for skill checks, but the letters aren't really needed). weapons have their damage written as: 2-4-6 (so... Light-Medium-Heavy damage, basically). rolling an L means it's light damage and therefore 2 damage. Maybe it's something that you folks can work with? The cool part about this you can make cool weapon gimicks like 1-1-4 for a dagger, because heavy damage is technically a crit. Or something that may be faulty at times so 2-2-0, or even something that is consistent with 2-2-2. Heck, you can even use abilities here like: on M damage, do X :)

Hini Hinisson

I love this, I am so impressed with how you continuously improve on all the things that annoy me about d20 games.

Wizard Shenanigans

The damage table sounds very interesting to me, but I think having to look up a table to work out how much damage you did also sounds cumbersome. I think it would benefit from some custom dice, but that brings us back around in a circle. 🙃

Roman Penna

Worked great in testing so far. I found it made combat so breezy, and I think as I play this version more it will become faster as well.

Dalen W. Brauner

I'm really curious how many damage charts players will naturally begin to memorize during normal play. It's a double-edged sword of course: if players memorize an ability, the cognitive load is back to near-zero! But if that ability changes, either through gear or a level up... uh oh! Now you've got the WRONG chart memorized, and have to make sure you don't mix it up with the new one! Or maybe just as bad: what if a player finally has it memorized, only for them to learn a better ability that replaces it... Some of that already happens in d20 anyway, but I'm definitely curious about it!

oneeyedziggy

I see the potential, but was trying to think about whether this negates the value of the triangular distribution of the 2d6... the +X Does shift it up (as long as X isn't 0) but on 2d12 alone, it does seem like 2-4,5-9,10-12 on 2d6 is the same as 1,2-5,6 on 1d6, but then going to 1d6 does make the crit go from a 1/36 to a 1/6... so that's not great... but also on 4-6 as the first range, anyone w/ +3 or more is down to 2 possible results... so that seems like something to solve ( like, maybe if you roll minimum possible you still get the bad result? just 1/36 no-matter your bonus? I do like the idea of some stuff adding a new top-end above 12... that might make it perfect to add top end around 16+ so just as you lose your old worst-outcome, you gain a new third-super rare best outcome that gets more likely with +5 or more... or higher "level" powers are just like 2-7, 8-15, 16+ curious to see how it shakes out)

Tom W

I think youve read a little into a mostly inconsequential aside. I wouldn't get too worked up over word choice when we haven't seen an updated build yet. Besides, testers in the discord have been very positive and haven't mentioned feeling talked down to, or anything resembling it.

Ole Ingvar Stene

I think I like this - I play the miniature game Malifaux (and the companion TTRPG Through the Breach), so I am used to a system like this for damage. I am sure it will have its challenges and absolutely give MCDM more work to do, but could be really great.

Dan Batchelor

I think I like this as well. It allows for a lot more effects from your abilities beyond just damage. Now curses, blessings, disenchants, control spells, stone to flesh etc. can all have different effects depending on your roll.

Sergei Lakissov

I like it. You should work out the math of how banes and boons affect it and see if that still works (my gut feeling is that a boon or bane even with +1d4 or -1d4 could have too much effect on the result - but I may be wrong; the thing is that here it is about a shift from one result category to another instead of just a slight adjustment to damage)

Grim Bacon

This feels more and more like 4e (WHICH IS GOOD!) Keep the character sheet simple and one sided, but then the players can have maneuver/spell cards to track their abilities. All I ask is let most of the powers have some kind of effect at every level. It's not just 3 damage for a 2-5, it's 3 Damage and slide the target 2 squares. There should always be an effect at every tier of success so the powers feel different. If there's no effect at all on a 2-5 that just feels still like a miss.

Kill Your Masters

When I say talked down to you, I’m referring to Matt saying that there’s too much information that players will have to read through, and so they might reduce the number of attacks that any specific class has so there’s less information to get through. Oversimplifying things is the enemy of a good game.

BasCB

I'd actually think it would be EASIER to do levelling. You just change the effects to be more powerful at each step of the results table!

AnyDingo

I have started to try to guess their solutions to problems as a way to test my hopefully growing game design muscles. I fully expected a Power Roll to mean 2d6+1dX where X is determined by your kit. So a heavy weapon kit would be 2d6+1d12 and I got really excited at the idea of that since kits would now actually feel impactful and not just some numbers you passively add to your sheet and never look at. I must admit I really dislike their solution on paper. It makes trying to gain the most out of boons stacking not worth it since rolling an 11 on a damage roll and rolling a 24 because your whole party helped you stack boons the same damage wise, losing out on some of the tactical and fun nature of the game imo.

Murilo Trigo

Really cool and flexible. And if players still feel like rolling for damage (or at least some abilities) you could still have disadvantage on the "damage roll" for 6-, normal roll on 7-9 and "advantage on damage roll" on 10+ to fix that "I rolled 11 on the attack roll but 1 on the damage roll"

Phyrloki

VTT should actually be really simple because you can set up macros in VTTs like Roll20 so that when you cast fireball and roll a 9, it knows that you got the medium result and just shows that you dealt 6 damage to a 3x3 area instead of making you reference the table.

Steven V. Neiman

Another nice thing about this is that it means that the fall and collision damage can be both simple and appropriate again, since 1 damage per square of fall distance/remaining forced movement was really nice except for the part where any real combatant would have at least 30-40 hp

Mallory Glover

Yeah absolutely I think the system would work really well in a VTT environment!

Eran Arbel

Also worried, especially at high levels, that it would be, "What do I do? Maybe this." Looks at ability, scans chart. "But then there's this." Scan chart. "But what if?" Compares three different charts... etc...

Cody Rapai

Edges and banes can only stack up to two and add additional d6. You then take the highest or lowest, so your never going to get 24 in the current iteration. The fun bit is that a critical becomes much more likely with edges.

Cody Rapai

Based on recent streams I don't think there is an impact die. Boons are now Edges. You can have up to two Edges or Banes and they still cancel each other out. Each adds a d6 to the roll and you either take the highest two or lowest two. Rolling two 6s is a crit so double edge makes them fairly likely.

Mike Mahoney

I think I like this. Star Wars Shatterpoint (miniatures skirmish game) has a similar mechanic. You roll a pool of special D8s. Each one has 2 faces representing 'expertise.' Each character has an expertise chart. You count up the number of expertise dice you rolled and then your attack is modified according to the chart. What's cool is that all sorts of modifiers can be on the chart. More damage, more hits, special effects, etc. It's very flexible and gives each character a different flavor.

Nate

Wild magic! This is perfect for wild magic! Low roll on a fire ball and it goes wildly out of control and explodes in an unpredictable location

Spencer Aurand

This is a very different game from what I originally got excited about, and I think this makes me even more excited!!

Daniel

PbtA is the crab of modern TTRPGs

Wayne Cook

Rolling dice and checking a chart to see how much damage you do really kills the flow for me. I lose most of what I liked about getting rid of the roll to hit and checking it against AC. I feel like that fits non roleplaying games a lot better.

Kapton the Architect

I had a pretty visceral reaction to this idea too lol. But I'll wait and see what it looks like before coming to any conclusions.

Quantum-Mechanic

I wonder if a 3d6 roll is coming to allow for a larger number of ranges.

Wayne Cook

It would be so much easier to use different dice for kits instead. 2d4, 2d6, 2d8, etc. it also gives you the less average DMG for more crit chance vs more average DMG with less crit chance. But HP is already so inflated that I don't know🤷.

Sammie

Yes this is definitely an example of parallel design. Strike! is amazing and it’s nice to see MCDM coming to a mechanic like the one the author of Strike! made, but with something that makes sense for their design goals (avoid null result, etc.)

Mentalic

I dig it. Success tiers could probably work well for skill stuff too.

Neil Reigelsperger

I would almost say lean harder in to this. Differentiate these brackets as much as possible. If you are having to reference a chart for the result I would suggest you don't want the results to be too samey. Maybe the lower end could do lower damage but grant a tactical boon of some kind and the higher end could lay out heavier damage and extend the targets or add negative effects to the enemy etc

Laber Lampe

This idea certainly has potential. It kind of is an attack roll, but as you said, without the null result. Lets see how it feels in testing, but if the 4 Tier system from Pathfinder is any indication, this could be good. On the point of fewer abilities, depends on which abilities are cut and at what level. Having different things to do is more fun, esp. early on. Three meaningfully different signature abilites that can be used basically at will is something great about this system. Much more variety and better feel than the usual standard attack + maybe one additional different attack. Abilities being combined into the power roll could work great, but as you said only with similar or escalating effects. Different or way more impactful effects might be problematic if bound to a roll, as you cannot really plan around them well. So combining abilities into fewer overall might be harder without making cuts. EDIT: Original post was more on how it might affect signature abilities. Now much more general feedback.

Laber Lampe

Would depend on how defense works. As the dice is also the "attack roll", having a lighter kit would also mean that you often do nothing/a lot less. Just doesnt feel great.

Daniel Klee

At first the word "chart" - espacially with "Rolemaster" in the same sentence made me worry. The thing about charts and tables in TTRPGs I learned from this system is, that while being a robust an easy to understand way in giving dice rolls very different an meanigfull outcomes they often tend to go way overboard and REALLY slow the game down. But a short chart with just three entries sounds like something that could really work. And it looks like a good blueprint for a skill system with more results than just failure/success.

Wayne Cook

You would never do nothing because there is still no attack role. Lighter kit would have lower average DMG per roll but higher crit chance.

Sam Trapp

I went through these same stages of reaction. I had to stop myself from saying "oh no" out loud when I first read "chart." A simple 3 entry table printed on each ability has me really excited though! It is simple enough that we could remember the effect of each entry of your common abilities, after a few uses. This also sounds like an easy combat roleplaying hook.

Zoopshab

My hat goes off to you sir. It's so simple, correct, does all the things one would want. I would never have thought of it.

Ben Fisher

Just getting around to reading this. It's been a busy little while for me. I love the idea. Lean hard into it. You can differ the results in a bunch of different ways such that the difference grows directly out of the class fantasy. The bad roll could be decent but grow linearly for a Tactician but for wild magic you could start as something of a negative but, as someone else mentioned, could grow almost exponentially from the good roll to the great. Also the left of the chart being the same is a necessity at the table but also this system lends itself very well to homebrewing. I also wonder if utility abilities that add a chart to a specific kind of skill roll for your specific character could get interesting. Only real suggestion I've got is the crit being on 11 or 12 because 2-3% chance feels low and 5-6% somehow feels way better... maybe just because of the 5% of d20 in my personal player psychology but 2.x% feels bad to me no matter how much I try to remove my bias / gaming history. But that's not specific to this idea so barely worth mentioning here.

JLC

This is about 1/2 way to what the Total//Effect System does, and that's a very good thing.

Ernge

Or a D20 roll lol. It could work like Pathfinder's attack roll, but just take out damage dice and the null result.

Ernge

I could see a house rule where you roll 2d6 for damage every time the game calls for 7 damage, or something like that