What's your preferred resolution mechanic, /tg/?
>>44832831
Trial by fire!
>>44832850
Afraid I don't have any gas on hand, anon.
I do have a nice range of dice, though.
>>44832831
Mutual masturbation.
>>44832831
Jenga
>>44832974
Hello, Dread.
In our group we play slaps.
>>44832831
>What's your preferred resolution mechanic, /tg/?
Pistols. At dawn.
Have your second ready.
>>44832983
Hello /tg/?
Roll and keep dice pool.
>>44833775
Like shadowrun? I see this answer in all these threads and I'm honestly not certain what that means
>>44833817
Roll 6 Keep 4 means you roll six dice, then choose four out of those to become the result, discarding the other two.
>>44832831
oral and whoever gets off first loses
>>44833015
Beat me to it.
>>44832831
Vocal argument?
>>44834785
No, that would be this >>44832946 guy. You pointed to the wrong post.
Dice. They have clear numbers, can be manipulated easily, fall in line perfectly with statistics, and can be played with in a million little ways.
To be fair, I wish there were other resolution mechanics as creative and fun as the Jenga-tower from Dread is, but its just not something I think is very easy to divorce from tabletop. Not that I have a problem with it because dice are just that good. Simple, easy, no problem.
Blowjob competitionI'm the DM
d20+modifier.
>>44835093
Worst taste confirmed. Dice pools all day every day.
>>44832831
1080p
>>44835135
>not 8k
>>44832831
Charlie horse.
>>44832831
>What's your preferred resolution mechanic, /tg/?
2d6 or >>44832850
>>44832831
I really enjoy the roll & keep mechanic of 7th Sea.
Castle Falkenstein's card system is great as well, though not one I'd use with other games.
>>44832831
roll-under, be it a d100, 2d10s to simulate a d100, or a d20 as a d100/5
roll-under is the only way to properly do flat distribution, and it's also very versatile
I like dicepool systems but usually me or my friends don't have the amount of dice required to play them properly and end up rolling the same two or three dice a bunch of times and it's really bothersome
>>44832831
Competitive seesaw.
>>44832831
Awesome dice, OP. Too bad they're not in d10.
>>44833775
I'm with this guy.
>>44833775
>>44835093
>>44835835
>>44836227
>>44836402
I appreciate the serious answers. Any love for percentile dice?
>>44836567
Yeah, I can't remember their name offhand, but I almost ordered a set... Except they're like $3/die. And you only get 2 in a set. Shame.
Roll over. It's perfectly functional and you can keep probability of success hidden from players.
>>44838554
>Any love for percentile dice?
I don't hate them, but most systems that do them are really not my thing, Delta Green excluded.
>>44836528
C-competitive?
>>44832831
2d6>1d6
>>44832831
Asking my dad.
>>44839197
Well, did he resolve this question, anon?
If not, I'm afraid to say you might have an unreliable judge.
>>44832831
Five finger fillet. Whoever gets stabbed in the finger first loses.
>>44832831
I'm a fan of the roll and keep on d10s myself.
>>44836402
>2d10s to simulate a d100
this is not okay
its 1/100 to get a 1, 2, 3, 5, 7
1/50 to get a 4, 6, 8, 10
and all prime numbers over 7 are impossible
>>44841484
....what? There are some problems with using one die as tens place and one as ones place, but how does that result in no prime numbers above seven? If you get a 1 on each die, that's 11.
>>44841484
one's in tens and the other ones 0-9
it's a d% and a d10
the range becomes 0-99 you egg
how does roll and keep works?
>>44841898
dice pools where you select a few dice after rolling and keep those as your resullt or sumthin
>>44832831
Sexual gratification.
>>44841670
he thinks you're supposed to multiply one by the other i guess?????
not sure how he reached that conclusion
>>44832831
I really like the FFG RPG dice system.
3d6 roll under
Good statistical probability without having to use a million dice or use funky dice that would be harder to get
Custom set of d6s: each die has two sides showing Swords, two side showing Shields, and two side showing Wheels.
Combat works like this: each side rolls a pool of dice. If you rolled more Swords (offensive) than your opponent rolled Shields (defensive) you do damage equal to the number of Wheels (qualitative) you rolled, and vice versa.
>>44832831
Percentile.
>>44832831
we don't, the players just play it out at the table like normal human beings - why bother with stats in a social game? just gotta talk to your fellow human being, man
just like the wizard player has to cast the spell he wants, barbarian's got to prove he can lift my fridge, and the kender player has to get the fuck out of my house.
Do I have to pick just one? If so I would go with what >>44836402 said. But I really like the ORE resolution system. It'sfun.Is fun still a word you're supposed to put in spoilers. I only come to /tg/ for a few weeks ever few months.
>>44832831
I fucking hate those things. I shouldn't have to peer at a face to work out how many fucking lines are on it. Fuck that shit. Imagine trying to play Shadowrun with those fuckers.
>>44845719
Eh, the white-on-black ones are easy enough to read. And their colored dice are about as easy. It's just the silver ones that aren't great.
I like dice pools. Nice way to visualize how good at you in something. Dropping a load of 15 dice on the table feels better than saying "I have a plus 15 to hit".
>>44845719
You must hate d6 with pips.
>>44844481
I really like those
>>44844925
I like this, especially if characters can exchange a number of regular dice for biased ones based on their character type:
- aggressive top-heavy attackers can roll a few 3 sword 3 wheel dice
- poised artisan-warriors can roll a few 3 shield 3 sword dice
- calculated battle-technicians can roll a few 3 wheel 3 shield dice
The fact that offence is also dependent on two dice results but defence is only on one neatly alters the risk calculations for attackers and defendrs without any clunky external rules.
>>44832831
Roll under d12
GM writes down an equation. Player must solve. Difficulty of the problem is the DC difficulty. How long it takes you to solve determines how long it takes your character to do it.
If two players (or more) players are competing they write down the answer and turn it into the GM, again speed is how quickly the character does it and correctness is how well they do it.
why does every one like roll under systems? Doesn't that put a hard cap on all of the stats?
Also, i prefer either dice pools or 4z6 replacing a d20. I like bell live curves. I find it silly that a character could be a walking death machine, and then miss every single attack because he rolled a 1 like eight times.
>>44846892
>Doesn't that put a hard cap on all of the stats?
Depends on how it's done. Heroquest has the masteries mechanic so you keep going up to 20 again but with some masteries behind it (each mastery bumps level of success, left over after critical success makes the opposing roll worse. Masteries cancel out).
But then again I don't need multiple year games with huge character advancement (at least not mechanically). I would rather a tight campaign or a few arcs then something new.
>>44844925
Did you come up with this yourself? Is there a system that uses this? I feel like you could have a lot of fun with this concept
For example a rogue-type character could have some kind of precision strike ability that lets them exchange a set number of wheels for swords. A more brutish character could choose an ability that does the opposite. I think this would be fantastic for a rules-light system. By playing around with the concept (possibly combining it with >>44846625) you could make combat much more mechanically interesting and increase character/class differentiation without making the rules significantly more complex.
>>44846693
i tried that once and it was shit
the failure chance was too damn high
care to explain?
>>44832850
Aerys the second pls go
>>44844481
>>44846432
The idea of comparing icons i like but it's overtlly esoteric
Some like ticks and cross really would do.
Favorite of all time has to be a regular pack of cards.
>>44841898
You roll Xd10s, then keep the best Y - denoted as XkY. You then add up the results and compare them to a target number.
It's one of my favorite systems, and one of the only good things to come out of Seventh Sea. Which is why they're getting rid of it on the new edition.
I once ran a campaign of D&D with nothing but coins on-hand using quick binary conversions (I'm in computer architecture stuff). Obviously you can only roll in powers of two unless you want things to be even more needlessly complex, but d16 works if you just reduce DCs and ACs by 2 (the system using 10+[number] to determine a target number to roll is directly related to the d20 being used, after all). Hit dice were taken average, weapons were fudged to be d4 or d8 plus some number to have similar average to the one we were emulating. Critical threat ranges were higher but we didn't mind - that was the only thing with an actually meaningfully-skewed average.
All went pretty smoothly, great times were had and you only need 4 different denominations in your coinage (or you can flip one repeatedly in fixed order but that's annoying).
Prison isn't all bad.
>>44849225
You could do Ubiquity games easily with coins. It's a dice pool game where even are success and odds are fail (or the other way around which I prefer. 1 is true damn it).
>>44832831
TRIAL BY STONE
>>44832850
>>44849304
Trial by water.
>>44849225
>Prison isn't all bad.
I was wondering where you have the time to do all maths but not a really supply of dice.
I never understood roll under, but I haven't played a system with it yet.
Could someone explain it to me? It seems so strange to me that you'd be aiming underneath something when applying modifiers to your roll upwards is so much more intuitive.
>>44835104
> dice pools
Have fun rolling 10d6 to do a basic action. Fucking GURPS is faster.
>>44844481
This is the most autistic shit ever. Please explain what it offers over boring old roll + adds? Keeping in mind that shit like the Apocalypse World mechanic does this "partial success" and "le consquences" shit just as well.
>>44849812
You roll under, adding or subtracting modifiers to the DC.
>>44849812
>when applying modifiers to your roll upwards is so much more intuitive
Is it though?
"I need to roll a 5 or better, so I have an 80% chance of success" vs "I need to roll 80 or under so I have an 80% chance of success."
And then modifiers are either -X% or just half skill for hard and double skill for easy. As the GM I can just ask the people at the table to "make a survival check" and people can tell me if they make it or not rather than them adding everything up, telling me, then me telling them if they pass or fail.
>>44849812
Well, let's use percentile dice roll-under (d100) as an example.
All modifiers and targets directly relate to what you're doing. If your target is 40, you have a 40% chance to meet your target. If you have, say, a sight on your rifle that gives you an extra +5 to your Ballistics skill, then you know immediately that it's a 5% increase to your chance of success.
You still apply modifiers upward, but you apply them to the TARGET rather than to the roll itself.
>>44846892
>Doesn't that put a hard cap on all of the stats?
No, why would it?
>>44849860
I'm sorry, but as an autist there's no way that symbols with vague descriptions of how to interpret them in whatever circumstances your game may find itself is more autistic than simple numbers that you know what to do with. It's too loosey-goosey for me.
>>44849860
>Please explain what it offers over boring old roll + adds?
FFG gets more money.
>>44844481
So triumph and despair don't cancel? If you roll both of those all kinds of crazy shit happens?
>>44848653
Yeah I can see the value in more flexible and utilitarian symbols.
Let's say a circle, a tick and a star for good symbols, and a crossed-circle, a cross and a scribble for bad ones.
>>44850257
Of course they cancel, it says they count as ticks and crosses. Their benefits are conditional on a success and failure respectively, so you won't see the impact of a despair result unless you've cancelled all the triumphs out anyway. Vice versa. This is what distinguishes them from advantages and threats, which are independent of result.
>>44850640
Damn I feel dumb. My best guess is that I was combining them with the advantage/threat where it works even on a failure/success respectively. I'm just going to use the tired excuse.
>>44850741
Well that's probable, it's five in the morning where I am but I feel awake. Ever since I found fasting I've had tonnes of energy, I never misread shit or get pointless angry at people or other normal mistakes.
Back to dice, I wonder if there's some way to combine >>44844481 with >>44844925.
>>44834824 Underrated post
>>44850640
Incorrect, Anon. The Triumph and Despair symbols have two effects, the first operating as a normal Success or Failure result, the second being an additional positive or negative effect (depending on the symbol rolled), which happens EVEN IF THE FIRST ASPECT OF THE RESULT WAS CANCELED.
Check EotE core book page 12-14 for the exact wordings if you don't believe me.
>>44832831
Took me like three minutes to figure out how to read those dice.
>>44849225
Fuck flipping coins. Finger throws are better. Do like rock-paper-scissors, but throw out 0 to 5 fingers instead of rock, paper or scissors. Tally the number of fingers the two of you threw out to generate a number ranging from 1 to 6. If the number is under 1 or over 6, you simply flip the scale (so that 7 becomes 1, 8 becomes 2, etc.). Presto! Instant d6.
Of course, you could do actual rock-paper-scissors as well.
>>44849860
>le
Kill yourself
3d6 roll under
>>44853778
Why would they not deliberately abuse that?
2d6+modifiers with thresholds for partial and complete success.
Pretty much everything I want in a roll. Has a light probability curve, modifiers are substantial, and more interesting results than pass/fail systems.
>>44849524
Copper pipes master race.
>>44854192
They don't know how many fingers you (the GM) are going to throw out. For any number of fingers they throw out, there are 6 different results, 1 to 6, depending on what you throw out.
>>44836402
>I like dicepool systems but usually me or my friends don't have the amount of dice required to play them properly and end up rolling the same two or three dice a bunch of times and it's really bothersome
Stop getting ripped off. Decent dice probably cost less than the snacks you eat one session.
>>44833817
Like L5R.
>>44832831
2D6+modifiers with three results : total success, partial success and failure.
Also OD&D because it doesn't have a unified mechanic.
>>44855332
That works fine, just don't give us a vacation of target numbers.
One Roll Engine. It's not perfect (well I think it is but there are legitimate complaints like there are for every system) but it is extremely fun and, as important, extremely fast.
>>44855135
not in my third world wannabe yuro spic country they don't
>>44856394
>not in my third world wannabe yuro spic country they don't
...
Welp. That sucks.Venezuela?
>>44856428
Nope, argentina
Decent dice are 25 pesos each, cheapest you can get is 15 per dice
A single US dollar is around 13 pesos right now
>>44856442
Holy fuck, anon.
>>44856428
A lot of older Japanese trad-games use d6s because of the utter lack of larger sided dice, resulting in games like Maid and Magical Burst which have crazy d666 tables.
>>44833015
>edgy Victorian detected
You faggots don't even fucking duel with swords, like an actual gentleman. You rely on guns, which require *no* skill. And when you do use swords you do it with tiny foils designed not to kill the other dude.
Disgusting.
>>44836567
The name of the dice are AKO dice. They're incredibly expensive. $18 for 2 but they look so awesome.
>>44856481
>le swordscuck dismisses firearms as noskill meme
Say that shit in /k/ faggot not /tg/ and see what happens
>>44856481
>Victorian
>You rely on guns, which require *no* skill.
What kind of steampunk assisted-targeting guns with homing projectiles are you thinking of, anon?
>>44856481
>You rely on guns, which require *no* skill.
Oh. For. FUCK'S. sake.
>>44856469
>A lot of older Japanese trad-games use d6s because of the utter lack of larger sided dice, resulting in games like Maid and Magical Burst which have crazy d666 tables.
I know. I GM one.
>>44856536
Nigger /k/ is *proof* that guns require no skill.
>>44856546
>be at duel
>stand at point blank range
>shoot the other guy
>that's it
There's a reason guns supplanted shit like swords, anon. And it's because they're easy as shit to use.
>>44856560
People missed in duels, anon.
You're thinking of effort, anon. Something can be fairly effortless and still require skill, anon.
Don't act like I'm the one who's confused, anon.
Anon.
>>44856593
Anon. Anon. I'm thinking of *skill*, because the big deal with guns (and to a similar extent crossbows) is that you only need to train people for a short time before they know how to get shit done.
People often missed in duels deliberately. As a kind of "I don't actually want to fight you now that I'm 100% sober and am actually standing here in the snow". But even when they did it accidentally, it was a hell of a lot different to fucking up while sword fighting. Especially if you're using a rapier.
Let me put it this way; you went to fencing schools to learn to fight with a sword. You didn't go to shooting school to learn how to shoot a pistol.
>>44856629
>>44856629
>>44856593
you're confusing "different difficulty curve" with "no skill" and also you're dumb
>>44856560
>20 paces
>point blank range
Seriously motherfucker do you even know how duels work and/or are you retarded?
>>44835135
>console faggot
1080p was only good 7 years ago. We've had better for years now
>>44856665
You're a retard who doesn't know what hyperbole is and also you're new. I don't literally mean it takes zero skill to shoot a gun (and win, anyway; obviously it takes pretty much zero skill just to shoot it).
It's not "different difficulty curve". It's "basically no difficulty curve" vs. "high difficulty curve".
>>44856667
Do you even know what point blank range is? Also, see above hyperbole comment.
>inb4 lol backpedalling
No, faggot, hyperbole's a very common way of speaking here let alone in real life.
>>44856751
>Do you even know what point blank range is?
The point at which it becomes feasible for a blank to actually do some damage through heat, pressure, etc. Not much damage, but still.
>>44844481
I don't like how it pretends that advantage/threat is independent of success/failure, instead of being heavily skewed toward succeeding with threat or failing with advantage. The rules seem to be written under the assumption that you can fairly regularly score a bunch of advantages on a task you also succeed at. The result is that you never ending up using a weapon's crit rating, but it doesn't matter because you can get triumph with almost every roll for a pretty modest investment of XP.
>>44856768
That's not what point blank is.
>Point-blank range is any distance over which the trajectory of a given projectile fired from a given weapon remains sufficiently flat that one can strike a target by firing at it directly.
>>44856751
>implying it takes skill to stab someone
Hold your horses, I'm not saying it doesn't take skill to properly sword fight against a trained opponent, but you're positing that the basic level of usage of a sword is somehow complicated or difficult. It's not. Unless you're claiming that everyone you might ever have to stab with a sword is trained in sword fighting, you have to compare like-skill levels. Two people who don't know shit about fighting with a sword can still stab and kill each other. Two people who don't know shit about guns can still shoot and kill each other.
>>44849821
>only 10d6
I always found it hillarious playing a group of jedis in straight wars d6. When shit really hit the fan, and you threw a force point at something, you would easily be rolling 20+ d6s. And you add the total together.
>>44856792
That's a modern misconception on about the same level as that whole 'literally' business.
>>44856814
The term point-blank range is of French origin, deriving from pointé à blanc, "pointed at the target", with the word blanc used to describe a small white aiming spot formerly at the center of shooting targets. Today, point-blank range denotes the distance a marksman can expect to fire a specific weapon and hit a desired target without adjusting its fixed sights. If a weapon is sighted correctly and ammunition reliable, the same spot should be hit every time at point-blank range.
The term originated with the techniques used to aim muzzle-loading cannon. Their barrels tapered from muzzle to breech, so that when the top of the cannon was held horizontal its bore actually sat at an elevated angle. During firing, recoil caused the gun's muzzle to elevate slightly, resulting in an upward movement of the shot. This caused the projectile to rise above the natural line of sight shortly after leaving the muzzle, then drop below it after the apex of its slightly parabolic trajectory was reached.[2]
>>44856768
Point blank range can mean a couple of different things, and neither of them are that. Originally it meant the range at which you don't have to compensate for gravity when aiming, so 20 paces would probably qualify. More recently it has come to mean the range at which you pretty much can't miss, so 20 paces would not count.
>>44856820
>The term point-blank range is of French origin, deriving from pointé à blanc
This is actually what we call a "false friend", a word in another language that looks or sound similar to a word in your language, but differs significantly in meaning.
>>44856862
This is what we call a 'desperate attempt to pretend you haven't been proven wrong'.
>>44856880
At the risk of turning this into an argument about the qualities of rubber and glue, I have to say that you've got a perfect description of your very own post there.
>>44832831
Die pools, provided they are success/fail rather than "add these together."
Failing that, 2d6+Stat (basically, apocalypse world).
Unless you're running a game like Fantasy Dice where the dice-trading mechanics are an important part of the system, I don't see a lot of reason to use anything other than the above two.
Generally, I prefer dice pool systems that rely on little to no math. Adding up numbers, even if its just two to three at a time, can really bog down a game in the long run.
Sets, such as in the ORE or my homebrew system (which was inspired by the ORE but uses d6s, it's a more Savage Worlds kind of take on the system) are great.
1-3 failure, 4-6 success, with bonuses and disadvantages for 6 and 1, respectively, is also intuitive and fast.
New Fire has one of my favorite narrativist systems ever. It utitlizes d10 dice pools, and your pools can be just about any size based on your stats, skills, and story/character-based aspects. You take the three highest dice and add them together; if they equal 20 or more, you succeed. How many dice it takes to reach 20, however, determines the degree of your success (and thus your narrative control). Dice explode, so you can possibly reach 20 in a single roll. One die is a "Yes, and," two dice are a "Yes," three are a "Yes, but," and anything else is a "No, but."
Adding to the game's Mesoamerican inspiration, these degrees of success are named after different times of day, since making sure that the Sun rises again tomorrow is why you do pretty much everything as a PC.
>>44851362
I've no idea that rulebook exists, but more fool me. Guess >>44850257's question remains open.
>>44854192
There's no way to abuse it. Each possible throwout has an equal likelihood for each value based on the action of the opponent, and likewise. Unless you can somehow predict your opponent's favoured number, in which case you may deserve the bias.
>>44856560
This is Prime Grade Trolling
>>44849812
>your skill/attribute/save/whatever is N
>roll dice
>if the sum of the die is N or under, you succeed
>if the task is extra easy or extra hard, increase or decrease your skill before rolling, respectively
roll under %
roll one d10 (0-9) dice for first digit of the number
then roll another (if needed) for second digit
then roll third (if needed) for first decimal point
and this goes on.
>>44862742
> roll one d10 (0-9) dice for first digit of the number
then roll another (if needed) for second digit
then roll third (if needed) for first decimal point
and this goes on.
> Rolls skill check
> Needs under 78.637
...Bruh
>>44838554
>Any love for percentile dice?
Yo. They're boring and workmanlike, but they can get the job done if you're not good at actually balancing mechanics. Percentile games are good in spite of, not because of, their rules.
>>44841871
>0-99
>not 1-100 masterrace
>>44849812
>I never understood roll under, but I haven't played a system with it yet.
Imagine you have 2 dices.
The number goes from 0 to 9
The first one represent the first digit
And the second one the second digit.
Imagine you have 100% of making some action, if you roll under you do it,
since all dices will roll under you have 100% chance of making it.
Now imagine some action have 99% of chance.
You will just not do it if you roll 9 on the first dice and 9 on the second one.
That is 1 in 100 chance of not doing it, or 99% chance of doing it.
Rolling under with with 2 0-9 dices allow the dm and system developer to know what he is doing, no need to imagine the math on his head or try to guess what a +1 on a 3d6 would be, what would be the difference between a 3d6 and a 4d6, or what a result of 15 would be on a 3d6.
By using a 0-9 dices instead of a huge 1-100 die, you can even work with specific % like 46.564% chance of doing or selecting something if you or the system want. Just roll more dices if and when needed, the chance of rolling 2 dices is just 1 in 10, 3 will be 1 in 100, 4 dices is 1 in 1000....
>>44854185
gurps used 3d6 just because d6 is a widely used dice, and rolling a single or just 2 d6 dont get enought range
>>44862792
> Rolls skill check
> Needs under 78.637
>...bruh
>open random.org site
>roll a digit from 0 to 9
>roll a 8
>failled test
>rolling ends here
>>44863021
You know. That could almost be cool, if you used it correctly. Round it off so that you never have to roll less than a whole number, but make it so every time you use a skill, it increases by 0.1.
>>44832831
Blowjobs
First one to puss out loses
>>44856809
Playing in my group's not-exalted WoD we'd regularly have 10d10 for a starting character's "thing" and by veteran status there'd regularly be rolls of 25+ d10s per character
If there was a wargame that uses d10s I'm fucking set
>>44856789
>never use a crit rating
Invest more in the combat skills then, we usually get triumphs and fail leading to deus ex machina and his with one success and enough advantages to crit a couple times
>>44862906
the only way to make it 1-100 in a d10 and d% simulated d100 is to add 1 to every single roll
Boffer combat.
