The core mechanic is based upon a 2d6 roll, with a result of 5 or 6 on any single die resulting in a success.  With Advantage, roll 3d6.  With Disadvantage, roll 1d6.

I saw this mechanic as being too simple for my tastes, when I first came upon it; but now after stumbling back upon it several months later, I can't figure out why I need 3E / 3.5E / PF levels of complexity to have fun?   Just sayin'.....

That sure does cancel feat trees and optimizers.

My issue with that mechanic, and stuff like the powered by the apocalypse system, is that having things that simplistic really divorces me from a feeling of connection to my character.  Take Shadowrun for example, which also uses d6s with 5s and 6s as successes.  You could have an ultra-specialized character throwing 15d6 on something they're amazing at, 2d6 on something they're bad at, and lots of values in between.  It makes them feel considerably more real to me than rolling 2d6 for 80% of tasks.

Quote from: Valatar on June 05, 2021, 12:32:21 AM
My issue with that mechanic, and stuff like the powered by the apocalypse system, is that having things that simplistic really divorces me from a feeling of connection to my character.  Take Shadowrun for example, which also uses d6s with 5s and 6s as successes.  You could have an ultra-specialized character throwing 15d6 on something they're amazing at, 2d6 on something they're bad at, and lots of values in between.  It makes them feel considerably more real to me than rolling 2d6 for 80% of tasks.

The concept appeals to me; because of how quickly you could teach the game to newbies, how quickly actions could be resolved, and the whole game could be run with dice that are readily available for purchase in almost any town.

Now; let's also do away with hit points, and simply assign a number of hits / attacks needed to kill a particular monster, pc, npc, etc.  The whole darn game just got fast and simple.

But pointless.  I've got a new RPG system, all you do is flip a coin!  Heads you've won, tails you've lost.  Couldn't be any faster and simpler, an entire adventure takes about ten seconds unless the coin rolls under something.

Quote from: Valatar on June 05, 2021, 03:09:05 AM
But pointless.  I've got a new RPG system, all you do is flip a coin!  Heads you've won, tails you've lost.  Couldn't be any faster and simpler, an entire adventure takes about ten seconds unless the coin rolls under something.

Reminds of MAR Barker's house system for Tekumel. Roll d10. Fail on a 1-5, with degrees of failure. Succeed on a 6-10 with degrees of success.

Quote from: Jam The MF on June 04, 2021, 10:56:24 PM
The core mechanic is based upon a 2d6 roll, with a result of 5 or 6 on any single die resulting in a success.  With Advantage, roll 3d6.  With Disadvantage, roll 1d6.

I saw this mechanic as being too simple for my tastes, when I first came upon it; but now after stumbling back upon it several months later, I can't figure out why I need 3E / 3.5E / PF levels of complexity to have fun?   Just sayin'.....

I get the attraction. I have it, as well as the recent Tiny Cthulhu, Index RPG and Black Hack.

I think it is possible to have fun with fast and light systems, but that doesn't mean those fast and light systems are giving you what the others can. It merely means you can enjoy games that are simpler. I really enjoy a lot of complex systems. I was playing (before COVID) in a really engaging Fantasy Hero / Hero 5 game. That every player had a totally unique character with many interesting, granular differences.

There is no single metric of fun to complexity.

Quote from: soundchaser on June 05, 2021, 08:17:12 AM

Quote from: Valatar on June 05, 2021, 03:09:05 AM
But pointless.  I've got a new RPG system, all you do is flip a coin!  Heads you've won, tails you've lost.  Couldn't be any faster and simpler, an entire adventure takes about ten seconds unless the coin rolls under something.

Reminds of MAR Barker's house system for Tekumel. Roll d10. Fail on a 1-5, with degrees of failure. Succeed on a 6-10 with degrees of success.

This is quickly becoming a discussion of Free Kriegsspiel Revolution games, RPGs played the way Dave Wesley/Dave Arneson/MAR Barker supposedly played way back in the day, with a very simple resolution mechanic but few or no other player-facing rules, where the referee adjudicates everything, the players are supposed to focus only on what's happening diegetically in the fiction, and the only real rules are the soft rules of the genre and fictional setting.

I made an FKR RPG that I haven't gotten to play yet; the rules are considerably less than 1 page. I imagine it is a refreshing way to play and can easily accommodate any genre, provided you have a referee you really trust who is good at establishing expectations and who can create a shared sense of the fiction. But I think most players want explicit mechanical bells and whistles built into their RPGs, at least for longer campaigns.

The TinyD6 games aren't that radical though, at least I don't think. Tiny Dungeons 2nd edition has an actual magic system, doesn't it?

I am all over the road with this one having run four or five sessions with the Tiny rules (between Dungeon 2e and Pirates). I own Cthulhu and Frontiers, but I am not sure if I will run them. This is a simplification, but three-quarters of each game retains a near-identical chassis, with one or two unique ideas introduced for each one. They are inexpensive, and in a way, modular.

One of the games I ran was completely impromptu using dice from a Yahtzee set and a scan of KotB on my iPad. It was a great experience. The other instances were part of a mini-campaign with a bullet-proof group I have played with for a long time, and it was a constant feast of unsatisfactory calories. The core mechanic is so dull, and in places broken, that I had to change to a home brew 2d6 system to salvage the campaign.

So for a fun session in a cabin on a rainy day? Sure. For anything sustained, it just didn't work for us.

I can separate art from the artist, however GKG is also becoming more preachy with each release. The incoherent rambling on using heritage instead of race in Dungeon was odd, spoon feeding how to use an Xcard in Pirates was mildly amusing, but the all too common Lovecraft is bad but I'll still make money off him rant in Cthulhu might be their jump the shark moment. Yelling FULL STOP at your readers after using periods in your text is lunacy.

Quote from: Valatar on June 05, 2021, 12:32:21 AM
My issue with that mechanic, and stuff like the powered by the apocalypse system, is that having things that simplistic really divorces me from a feeling of connection to my character.  Take Shadowrun for example, which also uses d6s with 5s and 6s as successes.  You could have an ultra-specialized character throwing 15d6 on something they're amazing at, 2d6 on something they're bad at, and lots of values in between.  It makes them feel considerably more real to me than rolling 2d6 for 80% of tasks.

5e also went with proficiency which which at early levels that +2 won't matter as much as your ability modifiers.  That said at later levels you will notice the severe impact in not having that +4 around.  Late games players will wish they invested more into skills and tools for that +6.  For skill base rogues a few of their skills and tools can reach +12.

Advantage and disadvantage will always need proficiency.

I own all the Tiny games and have run about half of them.  My experience with them is similar to what FingerRod said.

We had great fun with them when it was an impromptu "hey, let's do this tonight" game that lasted 1 adventure.  The two times we tried to go beyond that it more or less fell apart not too long after.  Maybe 3 or so adventures later.  My players wanted more depth (and by depth they mean mechanics) in something that is going to go on for campaign lengths of time.

Hasn't one of the selling points of D&D 5E, been "Rulings, Not Rules"?  Don't small, simple rulesets leave even more room for such as that?

Quote from: Jam The MF on June 07, 2021, 12:57:03 PM
Hasn't one of the selling points of D&D 5E, been "Rulings, Not Rules"?  Don't small, simple rulesets leave even more room for such as that?

It's a balancing act.  The most room for "rulings, not rules" is starting with no rules at all.  But then you have to make a lot of rulings, early.  Some of those rulings will be repeated.  Those you might decide to record and refer to later.  Thus they start to become rules.

The very best rules are the ones that would have developed naturally--at your table, in your game--when using "rulings, not rules". Assuming you had some idea of what you were doing.  If a game provides a good start on those without going too far into rulings that you need to contradict or undo, then it will be a good fit. Everyone wants a slightly different set.

I find that extremely simple rules tend to leave out some obvious things where I'd like a little more to work with.  Toon is the obvious exception, and even it has tones of implied rules/rulings with the huge number of examples available to the GM. 

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 07, 2021, 01:21:50 PM

Quote from: Jam The MF on June 07, 2021, 12:57:03 PM
Hasn't one of the selling points of D&D 5E, been "Rulings, Not Rules"?  Don't small, simple rulesets leave even more room for such as that?

It's a balancing act.  The most room for "rulings, not rules" is starting with no rules at all.  But then you have to make a lot of rulings, early.  Some of those rulings will be repeated.  Those you might decide to record and refer to later.  Thus they start to become rules.

The very best rules are the ones that would have developed naturally--at your table, in your game--when using "rulings, not rules". Assuming you had some idea of what you were doing.  If a game provides a good start on those without going too far into rulings that you need to contradict or undo, then it will be a good fit. Everyone wants a slightly different set.

I find that extremely simple rules tend to leave out some obvious things where I'd like a little more to work with.  Toon is the obvious exception, and even it has tones of implied rules/rulings with the huge number of examples available to the GM.

Yes, it seems that much in life is a balancing act; including RPGs.  On one hand, i like to dig into bigger rulesets.  On the other hand, I sometimes look at something more simple and think I have just discovered the grail of gaming mechanics.

I have found it great for one-shots and short campaigns but isn't the right choice for long campaigns for my group. But if the DM has to drop out at the last minute you can be up and running in less than half an hour.