In my estimation "modern" games differ from a lot of older games by being vastly more focused on the existing "gamer market" where as more older games we aimed at a much larger and more diverse market.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;662943I would assume the dice come with the game, as per Wfrp3.

You might have a point in terms of a price increase that, if these sort of peripherals, weren't used wouldn't exist - and wfrp3e proves that given the buy in. But that had a ton of crap not just dice.

However that is not really the issue. The question is, in the case of EoftE, do the dice offer anything that wasn't already possible in older/other games? The idea behind these dice is they provide more than just binary results. That's a worthwhile goal isn't it?

They are dice. They have a certain number of sides. They each roll linearly, so you can substitute easily. Say you have two six-sided dice, one marked Star, Sun, Sun, Moon, Comet, and vacuum; and another marked Earth, Air Air, Fire, Water, Water. Use two colored dice - red 1=Star, 2-3=Sun, 4=Moon, 5=Comet, and 6= vacuum; while blue 1=Earth, 2-3= Air, 4=Fire, 5-6=Water. It all translates fine, just like you can use any six sideds to emulate Fudge dice.

Thing is, "providing more than binary results" is a matter of interpretation, not a matter of the dice. I don't know of any game where the only thing determined is a binary success or failure.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;662957I don't know of any game where the only thing determined is a binary success or failure.

D02: Know No Limit !!1

Quote from: Rincewind1;662929If they are like W3e dice, you can substitute them. It won't be easy, but you can. Unless each class has their own set of dice, it's really a set of about 10 categories of dice, that you'd need simply to scribe each number to. Something that'd require getting used to, but I suspect after 1 - 2 sessions it'd work.

I'm not a big fan of FFG's new RPGs, but dice themselves aren't that problematic. Especially given that they are in boxed sets (and well, I doubt you can play w/o boxed set anyway, given the boardgamish amount of chits/cards).

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;662943I would assume the dice come with the game, as per Wfrp3.

You might have a point in terms of a price increase that, if these sort of peripherals, weren't used wouldn't exist - and wfrp3e proves that given the buy in. But that had a ton of crap not just dice.

However that is not really the issue. The question is, in the case of EoftE, do the dice offer anything that wasn't already possible in older/other games? The idea behind these dice is they provide more than just binary results. That's a worthwhile goal isn't it?

Quote from: flyingmice;662957They are dice. They have a certain number of sides. They each roll linearly, so you can substitute easily. Say you have two six-sided dice, one marked Star, Sun, Sun, Moon, Comet, and vacuum; and another marked Earth, Air Air, Fire, Water, Water. Use two colored dice - red 1=Star, 2-3=Sun, 4=Moon, 5=Comet, and 6= vacuum; while blue 1=Earth, 2-3= Air, 4=Fire, 5-6=Water. It all translates fine, just like you can use any six sideds to emulate Fudge dice.

Thing is, "providing more than binary results" is a matter of interpretation, not a matter of the dice. I don't know of any game where the only thing determined is a binary success or failure.

-clash

Design premise wise, the EotE dice are similar in function to the W3e dice, however the dice themselves are different so you cannot substitute W3e dice for EotE dice. Results-wise, yes you could use regular polyhedral dice if there was a table translating the symbols to the numbers on regular polyhedral dice, but there isn't. You would have to reverse engineer something.

These dice and the rules that use them are a barrier to Players who want to try the game. FFG has created a counter-intuitive rule system for their game which is more complex than any version of a Star Wars RPG that has come previously. If you want to create a product that is hostile to novice or casual Players, than I would say that FFG has done great.

Now, the dice are funky so that when you are rolling for task resolution, you can see if there is something else that complicates the action, either good or bad. Not based on the degree of success or failure of the dice roll.

Now, I frown upon this gimmick because the default assumption here is that the GM does not have sufficient judgement to pace the game while it is being played and the funky dice are there to do the thinking for the GM. A good GM knows when to slow or speed up the action, make a task either easy or hard, and when to increase the gain or loss from a task depending on how the Players at that GM's table are reacting to the game while in play. Using dice instead of judgement in this manner removes one of the most important distinctions between a tabletop RPG and a computer program driven RPG.

And that is a difference between Modern gaming and Previous gaming.

El Jefe is right. I mean sure you could map the dice to a table but that's enough of a pain in the balls that they may as well have produced eleven sided dice and made those the norm. Imagine having to look up a table or three for every. Single. Dice. Roll. No, there was a deliberate effort to make this proprietary. I've inspected the rules myself, and I tell you not a paragraph wheeled by without reference to some obscure symbol or another. Needlessly.

This isn't a new tactic (give them the handle and sell them the razor blade) but as far as RPGs go it is very unusual, enough so to warrant consideration in its own right as an attempt at a new phenomenon.

Honestly I don't know why these people don't release a system-free setting alongside their game rules, let their game stand on its own merits. Should I ever get around to releasing a game that is exactly what I will do, scoop up those who want to play by my system and those who would rather use a different system. It's an all encompassing tactic guaranteeing advancement.

The Mountain Witch trust points was never implemented before, was it?

Apocalypse World`s GM never rolls dice and weak-sucess neither, I think.

Also, FATE aspects.

I think each of these bring something new to the table, compared to more traditional, physics-sim focused, games. In fact, Ive read one of Paranoia authors admit they would used trust points if they had the idea at the day.

Quote from: silva;662971The Mountain Witch trust points was never implemented before, was it?

Not familiar with trust points so I can't say.

QuoteApocalypse World`s GM never rolls dice and weak-sucess neither, I think.

The GM never rolling the dice (at least for combat) made it into mainstream gaming in a variant for D&D in Dragon magazine back in the 1990s -- so the "the players do all the rolling" idea isn't new. All AW did was apply it to everything (and greatly restrict the GM in the process, IMHO). If by "weak-success" you mean the success but complications stuff, that's not really new either. I saw it in at least one game in the 1980s, although I'd have to go through my collection game by game to find it/them.

QuoteAlso, FATE aspects.

The invoke/compel stuff is -- as far as I can remember -- completely new (as is the silly bit some Fate-based games have where it can be pitch black in the area but it has zero effect on what's going unless someone spends a fate point to invoke the "pitch black" aspect). However, aspects themselves probably aren't new as I remember similar "keyword" type stuff in other games.

Quote from: RandallS;663002Not familiar with trust points so I can't say.

It quantifies the characters trust in each other. The more pts you invest in a teammate, the better you two work together against adversity BUT you are more vulnerable if he wants to betray you.

Its easy to see how it fits in Paranoia.

Saying no innovation since the old school is clearly wrong.
But perhaps there is so much you can do.

Gen 1 games (1970s) - The old school - D&D, Runequest, Traveller, FGU (Aftermath, C&S etc),

Post Old school innovation

James Bond - Hero Points, Degree of success based on Difficulty + skill Vs roll
Hero - Point buy (?), generic rule set
Amber - Auctioning of stats, diceless resolution
WoD - Dice pools

More recent

Various 'Storygames' - introducing elements of narrative control
Savage worlds - fixed target number but larger dice size as you gain XP
4e D&D - Advantage (apparently as a class skill for someone) to reduce numbers of Modifiers in combat

Probably lots of other things

Jibba, I think Shadowrun had dice pools before WoD.

Also, I dont remember seeing conflic-resolution before the indie-games.

Quote from: silva;663066Jibba, I think Shadowrun had dice pools before WoD.

Also, I dont remember seeing conflic-resolution before the indie-games.

Actually I think star wars d6 might have been the first (which itself came from Ghostbustsers ?) but I wasn't at all certain about relative dates (I though WW was before Shadowrun through)

Quote from: silva;663066Jibba, I think Shadowrun had dice pools before WoD.

Also, I dont remember seeing conflic-resolution before the indie-games.

Sure! It was conflict resolution by task resolution.

As far as dice pools (count success type) Shadowrun was before White Wolf. I think Prince Valiant (pool of coins) may have been slightly before SR.

Space 1889 I think might've used a dice pool for combat, but I can't remember when exactly it was, or if the pool was additive rather than success-counting.

For the step-dice, I think Savage Worlds was beaten out by Earthdawn. Oh and some people have argued that T&T combat (1977) would count as conflict resolution.

High Seas, the 1985 piracy supplement for Flashing Blades, uses a dice-pool for resolving boarding actions.

Top Secret introduced a proto-hero point rule, Fame and Fortune points, in 1980.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;663072As far as dice pools (count success type) Shadowrun was before White Wolf.

And, indeed, was cited as an influence in the very first Vampire: The Masquerade sourcebook for just that reason.