Would 'partial' die make sense?
I ask because I like both the mechanic of dice pools (where one rolls dice equal to their ability score) and large ranges in ability scores but those two things don't usually gel together because of the unwieldy number of dice one has to roll and then add up. So I was thinking of having players roll 1d10 for each -10- they have in an ability score and representing fractions of 10 (say 7 in a total score of 27) with a partial die and because they don't have d7s this would just be represented by what is effectively 70% of a d10 roll.
I have a couple of tables mocked up for how this might work. Basically, the player would roll a number of d10s equal to each 10 points in their ability score with the remaining points being represented by another d10 (preferably of another color to set it apart) that they would then compare to a table against the remainder number.
It's not particularly elegant but it's the best compromise so far.
>>43729358
> fucked up mathematics
Why though? In a video game yes but seriously when you sit at a table would you really like checking tables to pretend to roll a bunch of d7s or would you rather roll an abstract estimation like a single d20?
>>43729752
It's effectively just one 10x10 table. Then you simply add the number with the numbers on the other d10s to get a total similar to other dice pool systems like d6.
Well, lemme think. You have 6 kind of dice in a normal Polyhedral set d4-d20, not counting the second d10.
Why not let players progress through that? Well discarding the d20 because of the big gap from d12 to d20.
Like that
points ------ dice
1 ------------- d4
2 ------------- d6
3 ------------- d8
4 ------------- d10
5 ------------- d12
6 ------------- d12 + d4
7 ------------- d12 + d6
.
.
.
Alternatively
1 ------------- d4
2 ------------- d4 +d4
3 ------------- d8 + d4
4 ------------- d10 + d4
5 ------------- d12 + d4
6 ------------- d12 + d4 + d4
7 ------------- d12 + d6 + d4
.
.
.
Or probably a bit more like what you originally thought, just cutting out the steps you don't have dice for
1 ------------- d10
2 ------------- d10 + d4
3 ------------- d10 + d6
4 ------------- d10 + d8
5 ------------- 2d10 + d4
6 ------------- 2d10 + d6
7 ------------- 2d10 + d8
.
.
.
All are probably horrible systems in terms of probabilities
>>43729358
hadn't thought of that, seems reasonably easy to do if you understand how to round off.
Better than having to switch between d4,6,10,12s
>>43730419
The other option I've toyed with is rolling a single die and comparing it to a table.
In this case the player rolls a d10 and matches their roll on the table with their ability score (attribute+skill). One rolls a second time on a roll of 1 or 10 allowing for results higher or lower than the usual range a la critical successes and failures.
>>43731657
My main problem with this method is that it doesn't really give a full range of possible results. By the time you hit an AS of 30, for example, only one in every three numbers becomes possible (9, 12, 15, etc). I'm not sure how, if at all, this might affect things.
I've toyed with a d100 method too but that means a 100x100 table which is probably excessive.
>>43731657
>>43732669
Any thoughts on this insanity?
>>43733043
Don't.
Seriously, you're overcomplicating it.
If you want to use a whole handful of dice, figure out what the sane limit for a roll is - that's your trait maximum.
If you want to use a bunch of types of dice, figure out how many d12s and d4s you can scrape together (they are comparatively rarer than d8s, d10s, and d6s, and even d20s, based on my experience).
If you want the differences in levels to be significant, then have the player roll a d20 for every 10 points - then add the ones place in bonuses to any die (or every, if you want them to be fantastic all the time), and count off the successes.
Using a d10 for this would be unwieldy at lower levels, and people are apparently biased against die pools of 20 or more.
>>43733268
>and people are apparently biased against die pools of 20 or more
I can't even imagine using more than ten.
I have a simple idea for your partial die. Let the die be colored/special, enough to tell it apart from the others. Say XY is your stat, you roll Xd10 as normal, and then the partial die is also just a d10 but if it rolls above Y is is counted as 0. This is almost making a d7 when Y=7, but there's still the 3 zeros on it.
>>43735236
That's actually interesting. Thanks.
You could check Earthdawn, it had mechanic where the stat value was also the average roll of the dice pool used to roll for this stat. I recall a table of what die combinations would average to everything from 1 to mid fifties. And most of that was many dice from r the bell curve.
Damn it was overcomplicated shit if you actually rolled it, but most of the time you'd only check is the stat is over or below threshold
>>43730382
Actually my last suggestion doesn't look too bad ... or am I wrong?
http://anydice.com/program/7139
I guess one could build a kinda stable system around that
>>43738320
I'll check it out.
