So your conclusion?

Quote from: deadDMwalking;557340So your conclusion?

I don't know yet, I'm looking into some systems which use opposed rolls exclusively. But I am most familiar, and therefore comfortable, with opposed rolls for foes and TNs for obstacles.

The feedback has been helpful and much appreciated.

Thinking about Bless and the opposed roll. What about this:

Cleric attempts Bless. The spell works automatically, unless the Cleric has Doubt. Doubt is a negative condition which results in a Penalty Die [1P]. A penalty die is rolled along with the rest of the dice, but the highest die is removed.

Lets say the cleric rolls 3D + 1P and it comes up 6,4,3,2. The penalty die of 6 becomes the score to beat. In this case the cleric fails with a 4.

Now what if the roll was 5,4,4,1. The penalty die of 5 is the score to beat. Now since doubles are the highest (removing the 5) 4+4=8, the cleric still succeeds.

You realize that's crazy, right?  

Edit - Basically, if you roll with a penalty die, and the penalty die is ALWAYS the highest roll (as opposed to say, a differently colored die) the ONLY way to win is if you have doubles - even if it's only the highest roll (ie, doesn't get dropped).  So if the penalty is a '6', you can win by rolling 6,6,x,y,z; 6,5,5,y,z; 6,4,4,y,z (and if ties win) 6,3,3,y,z.  I don't like those odds.

The roll succeeded because of the penalty, not in spite of it.  

There are a ton of situations where I'd rather take the double than the highest die.  Double 3s are as good as a 6; double 4 or higher is clearly better.  

My guess is that you're very focused on the mechanical side of things without really figuring out what you're trying to get the system to do.  Mechanically, adding dice feels interesting from a player side - being told to roll a handful of dice actually stimulates the pleasure center of the brain.  But if the system ends up giving you wonky results, eventually people are going to notice.  

If you were doing a system where you added the result of all the dice, rather than taking the highest, it might work a little better.  Then a penalty could either simply remove one die, or to really make it difficult, you could drop the highest roll.  Edit - If you do add up all the dice together, then the penalty die could be a negative (ie, 3d-1p = 6, 4, 3, 5 = 13-5=8).

Quote from: deadDMwalking;557701Edit - Basically, if you roll with a penalty die, and the penalty die is ALWAYS the highest roll (as opposed to say, a differently colored die) the ONLY way to win is if you have doubles - even if it's only the highest roll (ie, doesn't get dropped).  So if the penalty is a '6', you can win by rolling 6,6,x,y,z; 6,5,5,y,z; 6,4,4,y,z (and if ties win) 6,3,3,y,z.  I don't like those odds.

I believe I understand what you are saying. Yes, the penalty die becomes the target number, and you'll only succeed if you rolled multiples.

Example A: 5,5,3,2 (5 is the P, 5 is the score you get, so you succeed).
Example B: 6,4,3,3 (6 is the P, 4 is the score you get, so you fail).
Example C: 3,3,3,1 (3 is the P, 6 [3+3] is the score you get, so you succeed).

Having one of the Troubles [Doubt, Hurt, Regret, Spent] is meant to be a serious condition in the game. You really want to avoid getting a trouble. Characters can choose to lower their threat score instead.

BTW: I got this from the HIGH DICE option in Risus.

METHOD ONE: Best Face

Instead of adding all the dice rolled in combat, combatants use only the
single highest die rolled (multiples are ignored). So, if an Angry Punk(5)
attacks with the result of 5/4/4/4/1, his total for the combat is 5. If
Merely Irritated Punk(3) responds with a 3/3/2, his own total is 3. Angry
Punk wins the round.

METHOD TWO: High Dice

As above, but don't ignore multiples. So, if an Angry Punk(5) attacks with
the result of 5/4/4/4/1, his total for the combat is still 5 (since he only
has one instance of his highest face). If Merely Irritated Punk(3) responds
with a 4/4/1, his own total is 8 (the pair of fours). The Merely Irritated
Punk wins, this time.

I'm not sure I'm 100% getting it here, but 'highest dice is ignored' and 'highest dice is the target number' are different and the former is fairly reasonable (just slows down likelihood of getting the highest result), while the second is a bit whacked out since larger dice pool ---> larger penalty dice (i.e. your skill is makes it harder for you to win), and as deaddm says means you can only succeed on doubles.

If you do want doubles to be required, there are systems where that's the basic mechanic like 'One Roll Engine'. It might be interesting to see how some of your mechanics would translate into a match-counting rather than take-highest system, though I have no idea what this would look like.

What the fuck game are we talking about again?  Am I understanding correctly that the OPs post is not actually in reference to any actual game, but to something of his own design?

RPGPundit

Yup.

Quote from: RPGPundit;558077What the fuck game are we talking about again?  Am I understanding correctly that the OPs post is not actually in reference to any actual game, but to something of his own design?

RPGPundit

Nice attitude.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;558142Nice attitude.

He was just clarifying not disparaging.

Quote from: RPGPundit;558077What the fuck game are we talking about again?  Am I understanding correctly that the OPs post is not actually in reference to any actual game, but to something of his own design?

RPGPundit

Yes and no. I am working on my own design, but at the same time am interested in seeing what folks like about the different approaches to task resolution.

I haven't played any games (at least that I can remember) which use opposed rolls for all situations. Many have said that opposed rolls slow down play, while others counter that if you are rolling simultaneously it won't slow the game down at all.

If you've played or reviewed a game with opposed rolls for everything, I'd like to hear about it.

Quote from: vgunn;558145Many have said that opposed rolls slow down play, while others counter that if you are rolling simultaneously it won't slow the game down at all.

There's no such thing as 'simultaneously'.  

First, have you ever played Risk?  That's a very simple game where all actions are resolved with 'simultaneous rolls'.  There are lots of people that insist on waiting to roll until after the attacker rolls (or vice versa).  They like knowing what number they 'need to beat'.  This is particuarly time-consuming if there are two different players with the same desire...  

Secondly, if you've ever played a game that lasts longer than an hour, you've dealt with situations where one player must excuse themselves from the table - to use the restroom, take a phone call, get a snack - doesn't matter.  If they leave, either someone has to be able to roll for them or you have to wait until they come back.  If you roll for them someone has to determine if they're using the right dice based on that character's abilities - and if they do it wrong, you might end up doing it again in 'fairness to the missing player'.  

Finally, even if you do all the rolling at the same time (even though it NEVER happens that way) you still have a 'comparison' phase that involves two people determining what they're comparing.  Some people are faster than others - in an opposed situation, the resolution is ALWAYS at the speed of the SLOWEST person.  That's a problem because the people that are quick at looking at and/or comparing dice usually don't appreciate the delay that comes from the slower people determining the results.  

But if you have a chance to put this into play, you should have no trouble seeing it come out.

I once tested a homebrew that used opposed rolls for everything.  It worked and didn't slow down play, but my players didn't like the "feeling" they got from rolling to overcome static or abstracted obstacles.  E.g. "why is the wall rolling against my climbing attempt?  Is it alive?"

Quote from: deadDMwalking;558148There's no such thing as 'simultaneously'.  

First, have you ever played Risk?  That's a very simple game where all actions are resolved with 'simultaneous rolls'.  There are lots of people that insist on waiting to roll until after the attacker rolls (or vice versa).  They like knowing what number they 'need to beat'.  This is particuarly time-consuming if there are two different players with the same desire...  

Secondly, if you've ever played a game that lasts longer than an hour, you've dealt with situations where one player must excuse themselves from the table - to use the restroom, take a phone call, get a snack - doesn't matter.  If they leave, either someone has to be able to roll for them or you have to wait until they come back.  If you roll for them someone has to determine if they're using the right dice based on that character's abilities - and if they do it wrong, you might end up doing it again in 'fairness to the missing player'.  

Finally, even if you do all the rolling at the same time (even though it NEVER happens that way) you still have a 'comparison' phase that involves two people determining what they're comparing.  Some people are faster than others - in an opposed situation, the resolution is ALWAYS at the speed of the SLOWEST person.  That's a problem because the people that are quick at looking at and/or comparing dice usually don't appreciate the delay that comes from the slower people determining the results.  

But if you have a chance to put this into play, you should have no trouble seeing it come out.

Excellent post, thank you very much.

Wouldn't you have to wait either way? Say the players are scaling a cliff. One has to take a break for whatever reason. How does an opposed roll make this worse than vs a TN? Not trying to be argumentative, I just would like it explained to me.

The last comment I understand about the comparison stage, so you are slower at the finish. But can it be argued that opposed rolls are quicker at the start because of less modifiers?

Quote from: KenHR;558152my players didn't like the "feeling" they got from rolling to overcome static or abstracted obstacles.  E.g. "why is the wall rolling against my climbing attempt?  Is it alive?"

Yes, this is the hiccup for me as well.