TheRPGSite

I had planned on posting this as an article at first but thought it'd be better to post it here given the nature of this.

I've recently formalized the rules a alternative psionic mechanic I use in my playtest games for Be Not Afraid and wanted to put the feelers out, I'm not totally settled on this mechanic yet so wanted some input and comments on it before going forward with the base idea.

So here is the article to the mechanic I've outlined. (https://socraticdungeon.com/posts/psi-proto/)

The problem with depletion dice is that because the odds of rolling below the threshold rise with each failure. The odds of depleting 1d12 is 25%, but the odds of depleting a d10 is 30%, and a d8's odds are almost 40%. This means a little bad luck snowballs really easily and this is a problem you might have to get (un)lucky to properly playtest. It's also a bit of an odd flavor for psychic abilities especially.

I suggest that perhaps it would be better to have a Push die rather than a depletion die so the player initiates the depletion. The way I envision this, you can always make a basic roll for your psychic ability, but that is a relatively weak ability. You can choose to add your Psychic die to the roll to push it, but that will automatically step down your Psychic die.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 06, 2025, 09:26:00 PMThe problem with depletion dice is that because the odds of rolling below the threshold rise with each failure. The odds of depleting 1d12 is 25%, but the odds of depleting a d10 is 30%, and a d8's odds are almost 40%. This means a little bad luck snowballs really easily and this is a problem you might have to get (un)lucky to properly playtest. It's also a bit of an odd flavor for psychic abilities especially.

I suggest that perhaps it would be better to have a Push die rather than a depletion die so the player initiates the depletion. The way I envision this, you can always make a basic roll for your psychic ability, but that is a relatively weak ability. You can choose to add your Psychic die to the roll to push it, but that will automatically step down your Psychic die.

Perhaps an odd flavor, but I think it fits better than psi points, as to the depletion snowball, while this is true, the threshold is per psi-power, so on certain powers it's not so bad, threshold 1 powers on a d8 is only 12.5%  or 16.6% on a d6, which doesn't seem that terrible.
Power choice seems like it'd be heavily weighed on current psi die size, which seems like a fair risk reward calculation.

let me outline your idea. (for my sake as I'm not very inventive) so for a push-die mechanic, it'd be a d20 vs DC for psi power? the push die is something you can spend to add to the roll, so in this example if you had a psi die of d8 you can spend that, deplete it's dice size and add d8 +d20 vs Psi power DC?

If that's the case I feel that makes it pretty close to a standard OSR roll for spell mechanic (which I have one as well) one of my goals is to make all the supernatural mechanics feel distinct and different one another.


I could be mistaken on any of my assumptions however.

I tend to like the idea of the usage die for intangibles, like weapon condition or how long it takes a torch to burn out, so I'm inclined towards this idea. It definitely goes a long way towards differentiating psionics from other magic. I also quite like the idea of having two knobs to turn balance wise, both the initial die size, and the depletion threshold, whereas most implementations of the usage die I've seen fix the depletion at 2.

As for the snowballing effect, I see that as a feature rather than a bug. as you use the resource and it becomes more likely to deplete you need to be more careful with using it. It leads to a natural rise of tension, whereas something like mana points will always be less so as even if you are getting low on points, you know you'll be able to get x number of blasts still. So if you have enough points for 2 blasts, you can use one and hope one more will be enough, whereas if you're on your last die, you have to use each blast with knowledge it could be your last.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 06, 2025, 10:04:43 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 06, 2025, 09:26:00 PMThe problem with depletion dice is that because the odds of rolling below the threshold rise with each failure. The odds of depleting 1d12 is 25%, but the odds of depleting a d10 is 30%, and a d8's odds are almost 40%. This means a little bad luck snowballs really easily and this is a problem you might have to get (un)lucky to properly playtest. It's also a bit of an odd flavor for psychic abilities especially.

I suggest that perhaps it would be better to have a Push die rather than a depletion die so the player initiates the depletion. The way I envision this, you can always make a basic roll for your psychic ability, but that is a relatively weak ability. You can choose to add your Psychic die to the roll to push it, but that will automatically step down your Psychic die.

Perhaps an odd flavor, but I think it fits better than psi points, as to the depletion snowball, while this is true, the threshold is per psi-power, so on certain powers it's not so bad, threshold 1 powers on a d8 is only 12.5%  or 16.6% on a d6, which doesn't seem that terrible.
Power choice seems like it'd be heavily weighed on current psi die size, which seems like a fair risk reward calculation.

let me outline your idea. (for my sake as I'm not very inventive) so for a push-die mechanic, it'd be a d20 vs DC for psi power? the push die is something you can spend to add to the roll, so in this example if you had a psi die of d8 you can spend that, deplete it's dice size and add d8 +d20 vs Psi power DC?

If that's the case I feel that makes it pretty close to a standard OSR roll for spell mechanic (which I have one as well) one of my goals is to make all the supernatural mechanics feel distinct and different one another.


I could be mistaken on any of my assumptions however.

I hadn't considered conflicting with other supernatural mechanics.

I suppose I should ask how far out of the OSR norm you are willing to go to support these mechanics. If you want to stay with safely OSR mechanics, the usage die is probably the best option. However, to my eye, when you say you want quite different mechanics...the way I would do that is probably with playing cards. It's very easy to make one mechanic use Cribbage rules and another Hearts and another Blackjack. That is way more complex and higher effort to put together than simply strapping on a usage die, but it also fits the parameters for what you're asking better.

So the question is how much effort you are willing to put in and how precise you want to be on flavor or mechanics.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 07, 2025, 07:22:43 PMI hadn't considered conflicting with other supernatural mechanics.

I suppose I should ask how far out of the OSR norm you are willing to go to support these mechanics. If you want to stay with safely OSR mechanics, the usage die is probably the best option. However, to my eye, when you say you want quite different mechanics...the way I would do that is probably with playing cards. It's very easy to make one mechanic use Cribbage rules and another Hearts and another Blackjack. That is way more complex and higher effort to put together than simply strapping on a usage die, but it also fits the parameters for what you're asking better.

So the question is how much effort you are willing to put in and how precise you want to be on flavor or mechanics. 

Card mechanics would be about where I draw the line as I find them a bit annoying personally, where I could maybe see a card mechanic working is some sort of luck based magic or voodoo magic, but that'd a lot effort for a stylistic choice.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 07, 2025, 07:22:43 PMHowever, to my eye, when you say you want quite different mechanics...the way I would do that is probably with playing cards. It's very easy to make one mechanic use Cribbage rules and another Hearts and another Blackjack. That is way more complex and higher effort to put together than simply strapping on a usage die, but it also fits the parameters for what you're asking better.

I'm not a fan of that idea. At that point you have one player playing a minigame noone else is. As a player with a martial character, I super don't wanna sit there and watch the sorcerer say "hit me" to the gm for 3 minutes.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on February 07, 2025, 10:00:55 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 07, 2025, 07:22:43 PMHowever, to my eye, when you say you want quite different mechanics...the way I would do that is probably with playing cards. It's very easy to make one mechanic use Cribbage rules and another Hearts and another Blackjack. That is way more complex and higher effort to put together than simply strapping on a usage die, but it also fits the parameters for what you're asking better.

I'm not a fan of that idea. At that point you have one player playing a minigame noone else is. As a player with a martial character, I super don't wanna sit there and watch the sorcerer say "hit me" to the gm for 3 minutes.

I have played games with dedicated card game mechanics (most designers will probably understand how to use Through the Breach most easily, as it is effectively a D13 with reshuffle and card-swap rules.) While I agree that this can become time consuming, that is not categorically true.

My point is to emphasize that the unspoken value here is to use traditional RPG components like a traditional RPG would. This is not a bad value--although too many designers sharing that value will lead to a lot of inbred game design. But this is a value you need to admit you have to see your own design goals clearly.

I note with some disappointment that you and Socratic-DM seem to be twisting yourselves into pretzels to avoid making this admission. Card game mechanics are not inherently slow, and Socratic-DM's idea that card mechanics should match to a luck based system when card games almost invariably feature player skill and the alternative is dice, which are 100% luck based....

I am not surprised you both don't like my suggestion. Often making a suggestion you don't like makes the path forward more obvious by contrast. What I am concerned by is that the reasoning as to why you don't like cards is based off statements which are varying degrees of wrong. That really isn't a promising sign.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 08, 2025, 08:15:47 AMI have played games with dedicated card game mechanics (most designers will probably understand how to use Through the Breach most easily, as it is effectively a D13 with reshuffle and card-swap rules.) While I agree that this can become time consuming, that is not categorically true.

My point is to emphasize that the unspoken value here is to use traditional RPG components like a traditional RPG would. This is not a bad value--although too many designers sharing that value will lead to a lot of inbred game design. But this is a value you need to admit you have to see your own design goals clearly.

I note with some disappointment that you and Socratic-DM seem to be twisting yourselves into pretzels to avoid making this admission. Card game mechanics are not inherently slow, and Socratic-DM's idea that card mechanics should match to a luck based system when card games almost invariably feature player skill and the alternative is dice, which are 100% luck based....

I am not surprised you both don't like my suggestion. Often making a suggestion you don't like makes the path forward more obvious by contrast. What I am concerned by is that the reasoning as to why you don't like cards is based off statements which are varying degrees of wrong. That really isn't a promising sign.

What's with this victimization thing your pulling right now? we disagreed with you on a couple of specific points? 

the main reason I brought up cards as a luck mechanic is because I've seen some encounter table and plot generator type stuff that uses cards and found them kind of interesting, and the Louisiana gambler/card player is a pretty iconic image of fortune and luck.

Sorry I don't really want to use card mechanic for psionis, womp womp,  maybe for a different mechanic when I want to do a Western or Voodoo supplement might be  applicable, but a card game for psionics doesn't strike a thematic cord for me, the merits of it a mechanic are moot if it doesn't even feel thematic.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 08, 2025, 08:15:47 AMMy point is to emphasize that the unspoken value here is to use traditional RPG components like a traditional RPG would. This is not a bad value--although too many designers sharing that value will lead to a lot of inbred game design. But this is a value you need to admit you have to see your own design goals clearly.

You're not a mind reader.

I don't dislike card mechanics because they're non-traditional. I don't like one player minigames because to the other players it's just watching the one player and the gm play pattycake. I'm sure that cards could be implemented well, maybe even for this purpose. Your examples, the message I was responding too, sound like slow minigames. Cribbage and Blackjack both require playing several cards in succession counting the total. Hearts is a trick taking game, so unless you'd suggest resolving each spell or whatever we're doing with one trick it's gonna take a couple minutes.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 08, 2025, 02:24:12 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 08, 2025, 08:15:47 AMI have played games with dedicated card game mechanics (most designers will probably understand how to use Through the Breach most easily, as it is effectively a D13 with reshuffle and card-swap rules.) While I agree that this can become time consuming, that is not categorically true.

My point is to emphasize that the unspoken value here is to use traditional RPG components like a traditional RPG would. This is not a bad value--although too many designers sharing that value will lead to a lot of inbred game design. But this is a value you need to admit you have to see your own design goals clearly.

I note with some disappointment that you and Socratic-DM seem to be twisting yourselves into pretzels to avoid making this admission. Card game mechanics are not inherently slow, and Socratic-DM's idea that card mechanics should match to a luck based system when card games almost invariably feature player skill and the alternative is dice, which are 100% luck based....

I am not surprised you both don't like my suggestion. Often making a suggestion you don't like makes the path forward more obvious by contrast. What I am concerned by is that the reasoning as to why you don't like cards is based off statements which are varying degrees of wrong. That really isn't a promising sign.

What's with this victimization thing your pulling right now? we disagreed with you on a couple of specific points? 

the main reason I brought up cards as a luck mechanic is because I've seen some encounter table and plot generator type stuff that uses cards and found them kind of interesting, and the Louisiana gambler/card player is a pretty iconic image of fortune and luck.

Sorry I don't really want to use card mechanic for psionis, womp womp,  maybe for a different mechanic when I want to do a Western or Voodoo supplement might be  applicable, but a card game for psionics doesn't strike a thematic cord for me, the merits of it a mechanic are moot if it doesn't even feel thematic.

I don't think you understand the issue. The problem is not that you dislike card mechanics, but that when you state an explanation as to why you want to choose against the card mechanics, your explanations are incorrect. Card game mechanics almost categorically involve less luck than skill because most card games involve a skill component and most dice games do not. The RNG range is a different matter, but that is very nearly the same as saying the RNG range of D100 is wider than D20.

Naturally.

I do not want to fixate too much on the card thing and derail the thread more than it already has. This is not about cards vs dice; it's about the designer skills you're trying to use to make these mechanics. While cards are not a traditional RPG component, most players are highly familiar with them, too. If your intuition is off when spitballing card mechanics, it stands to reason it will also be off when designing a dice mechanic.

That's quite the designer skills landmine. It's probably going to cause you issues which are more widespread than one mechanic using a usage die. I suggest rather than tiptoeing around it, you learn to defuse it properly.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 09, 2025, 04:48:55 PMI do not want to fixate too much on the card thing and derail the thread more than it already has. This is not about cards vs dice; it's about the designer skills you're trying to use to make these mechanics. While cards are not a traditional RPG component, most players are highly familiar with them, too. If your intuition is off when spitballing card mechanics, it stands to reason it will also be off when designing a dice mechanic.

 

Interesting pivot, from the object to the subject, and quite the sneaky insult at that.

 but I do not find this intuition issue to be self-evident, designing a card game and an OSR TTRPG are rather different affairs, hence we don't see a dramatic glut of card mechanics in OSR TTRPGs or very many at all in TTRPGs.
 which is not to say there are none but I imagine the overwhelming majority do not, this leads me to think the intuition is not self-evident or bridging as you seem to imply. Otherwise we'd see more interlacing of these mechanics as a whole.

QuoteThat's quite the designer skills landmine. It's probably going to cause you issues which are more widespread than one mechanic using a usage die. I suggest rather than tiptoeing around it, you learn to defuse it properly.

You don't hide insults well.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 09, 2025, 04:48:55 PMThe problem is not that you dislike card mechanics, but that when you state an explanation as to why you want to choose against the card mechanics, your explanations are incorrect.

Funny, because before you starting whinging, the only reason Soc-DM gave for why he didn't want to use card mechanics was:

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 07, 2025, 08:02:20 PMI find them a bit annoying personally

Was he incorrect about that? Does he not actually find them personally annoying?

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 09, 2025, 05:26:46 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 09, 2025, 04:48:55 PMI do not want to fixate too much on the card thing and derail the thread more than it already has. This is not about cards vs dice; it's about the designer skills you're trying to use to make these mechanics. While cards are not a traditional RPG component, most players are highly familiar with them, too. If your intuition is off when spitballing card mechanics, it stands to reason it will also be off when designing a dice mechanic.

Interesting pivot, from the object to the subject, and quite the sneaky insult at that.

 but I do not find this intuition issue to be self-evident, designing a card game and an OSR TTRPG are rather different affairs, hence we don't see a dramatic glut of card mechanics in OSR TTRPGs or very many at all in TTRPGs.
 which is not to say there are none but I imagine the overwhelming majority do not, this leads me to think the intuition is not self-evident or bridging as you seem to imply. Otherwise we'd see more interlacing of these mechanics as a whole.

QuoteThat's quite the designer skills landmine. It's probably going to cause you issues which are more widespread than one mechanic using a usage die. I suggest rather than tiptoeing around it, you learn to defuse it properly.

You don't hide insults well.

You might consider it an insult, but he's not wrong. There is a large skill component to most card games that isn't there in rolling dice to see what happens. You're acting as if cards are random as dice which speaks to not really understanding card mechanics at all.

There's a reason cards are used far more often in gambling (and the main dice game of gambling; craps; is based on bets on the results of multiple throws of the dice). Its because its skill in judging when and how much to bet (and when to stand or fold) that determines outcomes in a more gripping way than a flat rng result.

Take blackjack, the goal is to get as high as possible without going over 21 with faces counting as 10s and aces as your choice of 1 or 11. Knowing the relative odds of each value coming up (ex. there are four times as many cards with a value of 10 in the deck and only 38% have a value of 5 or less) makes the outcome much more skill than luck based.

Say, for example, what if a spell system were this... when you cast, you draw one or more cards. Add the card value to the spell's effect, and subtract the difference between the sum and 21 from your Mana pool. So the closer you get to 21 the more powerful the effect and the less it costs, but if you go over 21 catastrophe occurs. Depending on the system it could be a simple failure that costs full price anyway, or it might be a backlash that explodes in their face.

Now onto that imagine adding effects that force a minimum number of draws; an inherently risky spell might require at least 3 draws for example. You could have forced holds akin to the dealers... once you reach 10 or 16 you must stop drawing... limiting risk (one could still go from 12 to 22 with one draw, but it's less likely) and reward.

All of those require considerations a skilled player can leverage that are more than just "will my die roll more than X?"

Something like that would work well for some sort of unstable magic... you can use it safely though the effect is weak and cost high, or you can risk letting it loose, but the closer to the edge you get the more you court potential disaster.

And that's just blackjack card rules. You could have a different system where every time you perform some action you gain one or more cards that you hold onto say, until your next rest. When you get two with the same suit you can spend them to get a bonus to your next spell. Two of the same number grants a bigger bonus, three or more of a suit or face bigger still, runs of numbers, etc.I

Maybe doing something else lets the DM take one of your cards from you.

I could see something like that working for say a karma-based magic system... good deeds earn you cards, selfish deeds take them away. The more karma you build the more card configurations you can use.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 09, 2025, 05:26:46 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 09, 2025, 04:48:55 PMI do not want to fixate too much on the card thing and derail the thread more than it already has. This is not about cards vs dice; it's about the designer skills you're trying to use to make these mechanics. While cards are not a traditional RPG component, most players are highly familiar with them, too. If your intuition is off when spitballing card mechanics, it stands to reason it will also be off when designing a dice mechanic.

 

Interesting pivot, from the object to the subject, and quite the sneaky insult at that.

 but I do not find this intuition issue to be self-evident, designing a card game and an OSR TTRPG are rather different affairs, hence we don't see a dramatic glut of card mechanics in OSR TTRPGs or very many at all in TTRPGs.
 which is not to say there are none but I imagine the overwhelming majority do not, this leads me to think the intuition is not self-evident or bridging as you seem to imply. Otherwise we'd see more interlacing of these mechanics as a whole.

QuoteThat's quite the designer skills landmine. It's probably going to cause you issues which are more widespread than one mechanic using a usage die. I suggest rather than tiptoeing around it, you learn to defuse it properly.

You don't hide insults well.

I don't see how this is an insult. Modern game design is a large enough field that no one can possibly know all of the material to it, so skill issues are inevitable. And being frank, with the internet, skill issues are really easy to fix. If you can figure out exactly what you need to learn it takes like 20 minutes. Anyone who says differently on either count is peddling OneTrueWayism and likely huffing their own farts, too.

Now, I would say this is an oddball one. Most designer skill issues I encounter tend to be something between abstract and esoteric because most RPG designers forget to study fundamental game design. Things like gameplay loops, feedback loops, complexity budgets, or techniques to streamline material tend to be sparingly discussed in RPG communities. Which is baffling because this stuff is game design 101 in the video game community, often coming well before someone tries to learn coding or using middleware.

The question is not whether or not you or I have skill issues; it's whether or not you recognize it when it spits on your shoes and try to correct them, or if you choose to ignore them until something breaks.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on February 09, 2025, 06:21:45 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 09, 2025, 04:48:55 PMThe problem is not that you dislike card mechanics, but that when you state an explanation as to why you want to choose against the card mechanics, your explanations are incorrect.

Funny, because before you starting whinging, the only reason Soc-DM gave for why he didn't want to use card mechanics was:

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 07, 2025, 08:02:20 PMI find them a bit annoying personally

Was he incorrect about that? Does he not actually find them personally annoying?

How nice of you to leave things out.

Quotewhere I could maybe see a card mechanic working is some sort of luck based magic or voodoo magic, but that'd a lot effort for a stylistic choice.

I get that this is trying to be an off-the-cuff dismissal, but this off-the-cuff assessment is almost categorically wrong. Cards are partially antithetical to luck relative to dice, and provide features like hidden information or limited repeats until shuffles. The conversation had to pivot because suddenly there's something more important to the project to discuss.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 10, 2025, 09:06:28 AMYou might consider it an insult, but he's not wrong. There is a large skill component to most card games that isn't there in rolling dice to see what happens. You're acting as if cards are random as dice which speaks to not really understanding card mechanics at all.

He was talking about skill in a game design sense, I don't fully understand card design therefore TTRPG dice design I'd struggle with. That is what he's implying, clearly a low blow insult I'm not going to be gaslighted  into thinking otherwise.

And besides he got his math wrong regarding depletion dice, so a hypocrite at that.

QuoteThere's a reason cards are used far more often in gambling (and the main dice game of gambling; craps; is based on bets on the results of multiple throws of the dice). Its because its skill in judging when and how much to bet (and when to stand or fold) that determines outcomes in a more gripping way than a flat rng result.

Take blackjack, the goal is to get as high as possible without going over 21 with faces counting as 10s and aces as your choice of 1 or 11. Knowing the relative odds of each value coming up (ex. there are four times as many cards with a value of 10 in the deck and only 38% have a value of 5 or less) makes the outcome much more skill than luck based.

Say, for example, what if a spell system were this... when you cast, you draw one or more cards. Add the card value to the spell's effect, and subtract the difference between the sum and 21 from your Mana pool. So the closer you get to 21 the more powerful the effect and the less it costs, but if you go over 21 catastrophe occurs. Depending on the system it could be a simple failure that costs full price anyway, or it might be a backlash that explodes in their face.

Now onto that imagine adding effects that force a minimum number of draws; an inherently risky spell might require at least 3 draws for example. You could have forced holds akin to the dealers... once you reach 10 or 16 you must stop drawing... limiting risk (one could still go from 12 to 22 with one draw, but it's less likely) and reward.

All of those require considerations a skilled player can leverage that are more than just "will my die roll more than X?"

Something like that would work well for some sort of unstable magic... you can use it safely though the effect is weak and cost high, or you can risk letting it loose, but the closer to the edge you get the more you court potential disaster.

And that's just blackjack card rules. You could have a different system where every time you perform some action you gain one or more cards that you hold onto say, until your next rest. When you get two with the same suit you can spend them to get a bonus to your next spell. Two of the same number grants a bigger bonus, three or more of a suit or face bigger still, runs of numbers, etc.I

Maybe doing something else lets the DM take one of your cards from you.

I could see something like that working for say a karma-based magic system... good deeds earn you cards, selfish deeds take them away. The more karma you build the more card configurations you can use.

Yeah see at least you actually mechanically explained a couple concepts, I'll probably back pocket one of those for something later down the road.

I don't think a card mechanic personally fits psionics though.

Quote from: Fheredin on February 10, 2025, 09:44:31 AMI don't see how this is an insult. Modern game design is a large enough field that no one can possibly know all of the material to it, so skill issues are inevitable. And being frank, with the internet, skill issues are really easy to fix. If you can figure out exactly what you need to learn it takes like 20 minutes. Anyone who says differently on either count is peddling OneTrueWayism and likely huffing their own farts, too.

No you can't weasel word your way out of that, you effectively said I don't understand that I won't understand the most basic game design, which is an utterly ridiculous claim, I don't think card game design is self evident and you're making it an issue about me the designer rather than articulating how a mechanic works and breaking that down.

QuoteNow, I would say this is an oddball one. Most designer skill issues I encounter tend to be something between abstract and esoteric because most RPG designers forget to study fundamental game design. Things like gameplay loops, feedback loops, complexity budgets, or techniques to streamline material tend to be sparingly discussed in RPG communities. Which is baffling because this stuff is game design 101 in the video game community, often coming well before someone tries to learn coding or using middleware.

The question is not whether or not you or I have skill issues; it's whether or not you recognize it when it spits on your shoes and try to correct them, or if you choose to ignore them until something breaks.

You have some audacity to talk about fundamentals in game design when you can't even get the basic mathematics down right, such as how you clearly don't understand the depletion rate of usage die...

QuoteThe problem with depletion dice is that because the odds of rolling below the threshold rise with each failure. The odds of depleting 1d12 is 25%, but the odds of depleting a d10 is 30%, and a d8's odds are almost 40%. This means a little bad luck snowballs really easily and this is a problem you might have to get (un)lucky to properly playtest. It's also a bit of an odd flavor for psychic abilities especially.

(https://i.ibb.co/gL2RnYxz/Screenshot-20250210-153830.png)


Here is a graph showing the average amount of rolls you can get before a die depletion on a d10 with a threshold of 1-2, at the bottom of this post I'll provide the anydice formula if you want to mess around with it and educate yourself...

So the broader point, before you have the audacity to make this personal, check your math before you make yourself a hypocrite, you want to lecture me about a mechanic or concept I don't understand and judge me for it, while criticizing a mechanic you simply don't understand! and using it as an excuse to ram rod me with something I am not interested in while derailing this whole thread for your own ends.

Quoteset "explode depth" to 50
set "maximum function depth" to 10

function: usagedie D:d keep on TN:n {
 SIZE: [maximum of D]
 if SIZE <= 4 {
  result: 1 + [explode D>=TN]
 } else {
  result: 1 + [explode D>=TN] + [usagedie d(SIZE-2) keep on TN]
 }
}

output [lowest of [usagedie d4 keep on 3] and 50] named "d4"
output [lowest of [usagedie d6 keep on 3] and 50] named "d6"
output [lowest of [usagedie d8 keep on 3] and 50] named "d8"
output [lowest of [usagedie d10 keep on 3] and 50] named "d10"
output [lowest of [usagedie d12 keep on 3] and 50] named "d12"

Here is the anydice formula

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 10, 2025, 11:56:31 AM

QuoteThe problem with depletion dice is that because the odds of rolling below the threshold rise with each failure. The odds of depleting 1d12 is 25%, but the odds of depleting a d10 is 30%, and a d8's odds are almost 40%. This means a little bad luck snowballs really easily and this is a problem you might have to get (un)lucky to properly playtest. It's also a bit of an odd flavor for psychic abilities especially.

(https://i.ibb.co/gL2RnYxz/Screenshot-20250210-153830.png)


Here is a graph showing the average amount of rolls you can get before a die depletion on a d10 with a threshold of 1-2, at the bottom of this post I'll provide the anydice formula if you want to mess around with it and educate yourself...

So the broader point, before you have the audacity to make this personal, check your math before you make yourself a hypocrite, you want to lecture me about a mechanic or concept I don't understand and judge me for it, while criticizing a mechanic you simply don't understand! and using it as an excuse to ram rod me with something I am not interested in while derailing this whole thread for your own ends.

Quoteset "explode depth" to 50
set "maximum function depth" to 10

function: usagedie D:d keep on TN:n {
 SIZE: [maximum of D]
 if SIZE <= 4 {
  result: 1 + [explode D>=TN]
 } else {
  result: 1 + [explode D>=TN] + [usagedie d(SIZE-2) keep on TN]
 }
}

output [lowest of [usagedie d4 keep on 3] and 50] named "d4"
output [lowest of [usagedie d6 keep on 3] and 50] named "d6"
output [lowest of [usagedie d8 keep on 3] and 50] named "d8"
output [lowest of [usagedie d10 keep on 3] and 50] named "d10"
output [lowest of [usagedie d12 keep on 3] and 50] named "d12"

Here is the anydice formula

Yeah, this is straight bad-faith arguing for two very important reasons.

• You wrote the blog post I took Threshold 3 from, and
• You wrote the blog post I took Threshold 3 from.

Now, I realize that's technically only one reason, but it's such an important one that I thought it was worth mentioning twice.

Quote from: Your Linked BlogIf the result is equal to or below the power's depletion threshold, your psi-die shrinks to the next smaller size (e.g., d8 → d6).

    Example: A character with a d8 die uses a power with a threshold of 3. They roll an 4, which is above the threshold—no depletion occurs. If they rolled a 2 or lower, the die would shrink to d6.

I took the threshold of 3 example straight out of your own blog post's example.

Oh, and this is not just about the example. Of the seven psi abilities you provide, three are Threshold 2, and four are Threshold 3. My choice of Threshold 3 was not arbitrary; I chose Threshold 3 because the majority of your own examples were Threshold 3.

And you wrote the bloody thing.

(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FZLXFiEmtq1tp6%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=dbcb6357855042758e400b8f04300d9a8df12f865c6084a3fce4be986b1e9171&ipo=images)

Quote from: Fheredin on February 10, 2025, 05:58:29 PM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 10, 2025, 11:56:31 AM

QuoteThe problem with depletion dice is that because the odds of rolling below the threshold rise with each failure. The odds of depleting 1d12 is 25%, but the odds of depleting a d10 is 30%, and a d8's odds are almost 40%. This means a little bad luck snowballs really easily and this is a problem you might have to get (un)lucky to properly playtest. It's also a bit of an odd flavor for psychic abilities especially.

(https://i.ibb.co/gL2RnYxz/Screenshot-20250210-153830.png)


Here is a graph showing the average amount of rolls you can get before a die depletion on a d10 with a threshold of 1-2, at the bottom of this post I'll provide the anydice formula if you want to mess around with it and educate yourself...

So the broader point, before you have the audacity to make this personal, check your math before you make yourself a hypocrite, you want to lecture me about a mechanic or concept I don't understand and judge me for it, while criticizing a mechanic you simply don't understand! and using it as an excuse to ram rod me with something I am not interested in while derailing this whole thread for your own ends.

Quoteset "explode depth" to 50
set "maximum function depth" to 10

function: usagedie D:d keep on TN:n {
 SIZE: [maximum of D]
 if SIZE <= 4 {
  result: 1 + [explode D>=TN]
 } else {
  result: 1 + [explode D>=TN] + [usagedie d(SIZE-2) keep on TN]
 }
}

output [lowest of [usagedie d4 keep on 3] and 50] named "d4"
output [lowest of [usagedie d6 keep on 3] and 50] named "d6"
output [lowest of [usagedie d8 keep on 3] and 50] named "d8"
output [lowest of [usagedie d10 keep on 3] and 50] named "d10"
output [lowest of [usagedie d12 keep on 3] and 50] named "d12"

Here is the anydice formula

Yeah, this is straight bad-faith arguing for two very important reasons.

• You wrote the blog post I took Threshold 3 from, and
• You wrote the blog post I took Threshold 3 from.

Now, I realize that's technically only one reason, but it's such an important one that I thought it was worth mentioning twice.

Quote from: Your Linked BlogIf the result is equal to or below the power's depletion threshold, your psi-die shrinks to the next smaller size (e.g., d8 → d6).

    Example: A character with a d8 die uses a power with a threshold of 3. They roll an 4, which is above the threshold—no depletion occurs. If they rolled a 2 or lower, the die would shrink to d6.

I took the threshold of 3 example straight out of your own blog post's example.

Oh, and this is not just about the example. Of the seven psi abilities you provide, three are Threshold 2, and four are Threshold 3. My choice of Threshold 3 was not arbitrary; I chose Threshold 3 because the majority of your own examples were Threshold 3.

And you wrote the bloody thing.

(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FZLXFiEmtq1tp6%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=dbcb6357855042758e400b8f04300d9a8df12f865c6084a3fce4be986b1e9171&ipo=images)

A notable sidewinder for sure, but it doesn't distract from your central thesis being a joke.

But honestly I don't care anymore, Regardless I make my concession, you win, you outplayed me, you got your witticisms and zingers in, you outsmarted  my rash arguments and got a funny gif puunch-line to boot. you beat me handily at the word games and argumentation itself.

This thread is yours and I concede it.

This argument passed the point of no longer being worth having long ago.

To that end,

I think the usage die for psionic is a great idea. It definitely sets it apart from more traditional OSR magic systems. I like that having higher thresholds takes the place of higher spell levels, gating who can cast them and "costing" more to cast, while at the same time the difference between a threshold 2 and threshold 3 psionic seems a lot smaller than the difference between a level 1 spell and a level 2 one.

I would reword "Whenever you use a psionic power, roll your psi-die" to "After you use a psionic power, roll your psi-die" just to clarify that the usage roll isn't checking whether the current power goes off, but rather determines how much is left in the tank afterwards.

Something else you might be able to do, use the psi die for more than just the usage, you could also roll it for things like damage or duration. This would allow some psi powers to scale with level pretty smoothly, and allow for as a psonic is exhausting their resources that's reflected in the power of their abilities.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on February 11, 2025, 03:53:35 AMThis argument passed the point of no longer being worth having long ago.

Can't agree more.

QuoteTo that end,

I think the usage die for psionic is a great idea. It definitely sets it apart from more traditional OSR magic systems. I like that having higher thresholds takes the place of higher spell levels, gating who can cast them and "costing" more to cast, while at the same time the difference between a threshold 2 and threshold 3 psionic seems a lot smaller than the difference between a level 1 spell and a level 2 one.

I would reword "Whenever you use a psionic power, roll your psi-die" to "After you use a psionic power, roll your psi-die" just to clarify that the usage roll isn't checking whether the current power goes off, but rather determines how much is left in the tank afterwards.

Something else you might be able to do, use the psi die for more than just the usage, you could also roll it for things like damage or duration. This would allow some psi powers to scale with level pretty smoothly, and allow for as a psonic is exhausting their resources that's reflected in the power of their abilities.

Okay those are some solid suggestions, but especially duration and damage being tied to psi-die level, it seems obvious now that you bring it up, I don't know if I'd give every power this scaling property but quite a lot of them would.

It also gives an interesting incentive to use certain powers when your fresh to maximize their potency, and a good way of representing your mental energy reserves draining, each blow you land being a bit less powerful than the last one.

Yeah I like that a lot.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 11, 2025, 12:13:20 PMI don't know if I'd give every power this scaling property but quite a lot of them would.

Oh yea, definetly not all of them, but things like the basic bolt power would benifit greatly from it. Maybe other powers could use the die differently as well to model exhaustion, like the manifest flame power being able to manifest a 2dP sq. ft. area of flame that'll be less impactful, but will have some interesting flavor, and when a high level psion manages to manifest double the usual it would feel awesome, although you're also opening up the possibilty of getting a tiny flame out of it.