d20 games. d6 games (old Star Wars, Mini Six). Percentile (Call of Cthulhu). If people have to do funky mechanics on something as basic as a dice roll, they will not be interested in the game except maybe as a "one-shot and never again" option, in my experience.

Quote from: danbuter;506253d20 games. d6 games (old Star Wars, Mini Six). Percentile (Call of Cthulhu).

To each his own. I have experienced play with each of those systems, and others like and unlike them. About the only mechanics I haven't used in play, that I'm curious about, are the ORE and Amber.

All mechanics were unfamiliar (and hence odd) once. Shadowrun's staging was a weird beast when it debuted, and now its almost 25 years old.

Personally, I find Star Wars d6 damage scale extremely odd and off-putting. To each his own.

Your game. Your rules. Your fun.

You may be right, that players (or some substantial subset of them) will hate the mechanic. I think the mechanic is interesting enough to try in play. Just my opinion.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;506213But that's exactly the opposite of what you said last time

*sigh*

I initially said...

Quote from: chaosvoyager;503408It's unnecessary. Division like this can be done by simply choosing dice with the right range of probabilities.

Then you said...

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;503464I disagree. Not out of stubbornness, but because I need the following features:

• 4-scale success failure, for descriptive purposes. Simple to know what to describe, simple to describe.

• While being able to use the same mechanic to generate more granular results for use in damage and combat. (Impediments are -1 bonus modifier for each Success Level.)

Then I said...

Quote from: chaosvoyager;505221And to be honest, I still say the division by 3 could and should be eliminated. But if this division is only being used to calculate SLs, then it may still make sense to stick with it. So what are the raw values being applied to again?

Then you said...

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;505280The result, the amount by which the Skill Check exceeded the DN, is used to calculate Success Levels. That's it. Everything is done according to the Success Levels you generate.

So if those raw values are not being used other than to calculate SLs, then the division is unnecessary, like I said in the beginning. It's a barrier to play that, as a good designer, you should be looking for ways to eliminate.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;506213What other method will provide me with all the above benefits?

Fair enough.

3d6. One die decides temperature. The others decide value by picking the lowest result, and rerolling 5s and adding (which is only necessary when both dice come up 5, because you take the low value). I like treating 6s as 0s too, just to avoid the gaps for numbers divisible by 5, but you don't have to.

Perhaps it's not perfect, but we're getting closer. The general idea is that you want to use the dice to do the math for you. And a nice feature about this method is that it can be scaled to taste by adjusting the number and type of dice used.

On the other hand, I really like the Hot/Cold pair on a conceptual level, so I'm a bit torn. If I was implementing it however, I'd leave the 0 as 0, and reroll and add on doubles. so getting a 4/4 simply means you don't know the actual value yet, so you roll again to find out, and then take the temp with the lowest total. And the probability curve, while 'interesting', still fits an action movie IMHO.

But this still requires division of some kind. Maybe using a pair of d6 would work better, in this case I don't know.

Quote from: danbuter;506232That hurts my brain. I would never use that die mechanic in a game.

Short of the division by 3, all that math you saw was done by the dice.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;506235Roll 2d10. Keep lowest.

Equals are 0. If it's a red die, add the number. If it's blue die, subtract.

That's brain-bending?

You forgot to include the rule for rerolls.

Anyway, I don't think it's brain-bending, but it does depend on a clear explanation.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;506260Personally, I find Star Wars d6 damage scale extremely odd and off-putting.

The strengths of the system were its archetypes and simplicity. Everything else was broken as hell, and adding up more than 6 dice started slowing things down waay to much.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;506470The general idea is that you want to use the dice to do the math for you.

I understand what you're saying and why you're saying it. There is a great value in speeding play, especially in a game that's supposed to be cinematic. And the simpler and more direct the die method, the quicker Skill Checks become.

If there was a 1 to 1 dice method that produced the same arcs as I described above, I'd use it. I haven't seen one yet.

Like you indicated, using the exact same hot/cold die rolling method, but using 2d8, 2d6, or 2d4 produces smaller results, results that can be added directly, instead of moderating them through division.

I understand your point, I just am not convinced yet to change the scale of the dice. I will try different die sizes during playtesting, and see if the value I gain from avoiding division is worth the tradeoff on loosing the challenge curve between success levels.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;506470So if those raw values are not being used

The "Success Mechanic" is:

1 SL = Bare Success
2 SL - 3 SL = Success
4 SL = Incredible Success.

That, by definition involves an effect brake. This is deliberate.

The more granular results come from combat, where 1 SL = 1 "Wound". 2 SL = 2. 3 SL = 3. 4 SL = 4. And so on.

That's what I meant. The normal Skill Check mechanic requires an effect brake, a divergence from the 1=1 principle.

I was never going to follow that principle entirely, because the Skill Check mechanics require more streamlined results than the Combat mechanics. That's deliberate and desirable.

But like I said, I'm willing to try different methods out in playtesting and see which one works.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;506470I'd leave the 0 as 0, and reroll and add on doubles.

Doubles are Trouble, and I've got a couple of other mechanics built around that idea, so rerolling on doubles doesn't appeal. (Though it'd happen more often, 10% of the time but half of those times would be worse than just rolling the number. Sixes, on that point.)

But, I think a similar idea would work.

Roll 2d10, hot and cold. Keep lowest. Doubles are 0, unless you Max the Dice and roll 2 10's. Then reroll both dice.

This roll is adjudicated the same as the first. You add what you rolled the second time to the appropriate dice, hot or cold. Take the lowest, and add or subtract that from your Total Skill.

If they're doubles, that's a 0. If you Max the Dice again (1 in 10,000 chance), you reroll and add again. Continue until you don't roll 2 10's.

This makes rerolls much rarer, 1% chance, but clarifies the Maxing the Dice issue and makes rerolls potentially hazardous. Doubles are Trouble, after all.

Note: I do appreciate the feedback, and I'm not dismissing it out of hand. Right now, I think it's down to playtesting. (Once I get the rest banged together.)