Quote from: Lynn;876183If you can point us all towards some documentation that provides evidence of some real value to using the symbol system then I am sure everyone here would welcome it. It is contrary to my understanding of educational psychology.

How often have you encountered rpgs that use math beyond basic addition - the sort of thing you learned in elementary school?

There are theories of learning styles that claim people learn better one way or another; hence you get 'visual' learners, tactile learners and the like.

The fastest way to learn something is to build on preexisting skills.
Basic addition is a preexisting skill.

Learning and associating symbols like these don't leverage any preexisting skill. These symbols have no value outside of the game itself.

1: In board games it has been tried a few times to try and make non-language dependant rules. Another is when a symbol system is perceived to alleviate the need for reference tables. Also a thing in board gaming where there are stringent anti-table factions. The other use is when the symbol is interpetive. Its meaning is up to the viewer. Story cubes comes to mind there.

2: Very rare. Other Suns and Universe are the only two I can think of right off the bat.

3: Thats a fact not a theory. Some people are just wired to better grasp A than B. The vast majority though are pretty open ended. The thing is though that like alot of things. The initial encounter and presentation can and will shape perceptions and acceptances or resistances. New Math, or the newer Common Core for example. And if this is any indicator then here we have a simmilar problem as the symbols. Common Core adds an extra layer of complexity as did New Math way back.



Id like to hope that that is not what it looks like.

4: True. But most people can grasp and associate symbols. And the more the symbols are used. The easier it gets. Usually. But the barrier as pointed out before is that some can and will baulk at having to learn the symbols. Sometimes just on the principle of it. Which is a perfectly valid reason.

5: I agree. But there are far more complex games out there using symbols. LOTS of symbols! Dragon Dice is probably the poster child for that. Each new faction has its own symbol set. They are though somewhat consistent from faction to faction though. IE: daggers for one unit and claws for another both represent melee hits.

In the end it is much the same as resistance to learning a new RPG system. Especially a new edition with a new system. This was exactly the feedback TSR got with 2e. Some adapted. Some didnt for the simple reason that they didnt want to re-buy the books for what they perceived. Such is.

X: In the end its FFG and they have to have some gimmick eventually or they go mad.

Plain old +/- math is hard to forget. Symbols on dice need a look at the rules a few times to remind what each one means. Times that by the number of players at a table.

Common Core was invented by someone that hates the age-old base 10 numbering system.

Quote from: Omega;876259

WTF?

Counting on fingers would be far faster and more transparent than this odd bit of arithmetical legerdemain.

Quote from: Bren;876263WTF?

Counting on fingers would be far faster and more transparent than this odd bit of arithmetical legerdemain.

For us it was "New Math" back in the late 60s early 70s.

Looked something like this.

Spoiler

or this I think. Its been a long long time.

Spoiler

Quote from: Skywalker;876230No more than you can in refuting it. My comment was based on my own experience in that I encountered a number of players who stated a preference for the use of symbols over math.

Sure. I don't need to refute an unproven claim, just like I don't need to prove that faeries don't exist. But I did want to give you the opportunity to show that there is some statement of proof by someone, especially FFG, for  their methodology to have any intrinsic benefit.

Your anecdotal experience is what it is, but there's no support for it meaning anything other than that. It could be an exclamation of learning preference in general, rpgs only, or this game compared to some other Star Wars game variant.

Quote from: Lynn;876280Sure. I don't need to refute an unproven claim, just like I don't need to prove that faeries don't exist. But I did want to give you the opportunity to show that there is some statement of proof by someone, especially FFG, for  their methodology to have any intrinsic benefit.

Most claims made on forums can only be supported by anecdotal evidence, such as those you have made to the opposite. I am comfortable with that. To insist such evidence only shows to me that you are aware that your own absolute statements are equally weak.

Quote from: Lynn;876280Sure. I don't need to refute an unproven claim, just like I don't need to prove that faeries don't exist.

I never claimed my statement was anything other than based on my own anecdotal evidence. In contrast, you seem to be the one who is trying to refer to authority, though noticeable only in a vague way, to support your absolute claims on the matter. What evidence have you provided?

Quote from: Lynn;876183If you can point us all towards some documentation that provides evidence of some real value to using the symbol system then I am sure everyone here would welcome it. It is contrary to my understanding of educational psychology.

How often have you encountered rpgs that use math beyond basic addition - the sort of thing you learned in elementary school?

I've seen players who can easily count up a certain number of d6 quickly and roll them, but then take a really painfully long time to add them up (maybe with an additional fixed bonus to add to the total). And this is even with four to six d6. So counting up symbols may be a lot faster than basic addition, which is apparently not much of a preexisting skill for some people.

I've seen enough percentile based rolls where the chance of success is equal to some attribute times a multiplier, and where the chance of a critical or fumble is some set fraction of the chance of success or failure. Most complicated computations are achieved via lookup in a table, or are precomputed and written on the character sheet.

Quote from: Omega;876268For us it was "New Math" back in the late 60s early 70s.

While cumbersome that is less opaque than the other version.

I'm still very glad I didn't have to learn or teach either of those methods. I'd much prefer using the Field Axioms to prove the basic arithmetical operations. More fun and much less tedious.

Quote from: Skywalker;876284I never claimed my statement was anything other than based on my own anecdotal evidence. In contrast, you seem to be the one who is trying to refer to authority, though noticeable only in a vague way, to support your absolute claims on the matter. What evidence have you provided?

Evidence of what - that the dice gimmick is a user-valueless marketing strategy, or that its easier to learn something based on preexisting knowledge schema rather than substituting a collection of nonsensical symbols?

Quote from: rawma;876300I've seen players who can easily count up a certain number of d6 quickly and roll them, but then take a really painfully long time to add them up (maybe with an additional fixed bonus to add to the total). And this is even with four to six d6. So counting up symbols may be a lot faster than basic addition, which is apparently not much of a preexisting skill for some people.

Just by itself, counting the number of symbols is basic addition.

Quote from: rawma;876300I've seen enough percentile based rolls where the chance of success is equal to some attribute times a multiplier, and where the chance of a critical or fumble is some set fraction of the chance of success or failure. Most complicated computations are achieved via lookup in a table, or are precomputed and written on the character sheet.

Yes, Ive played those types too.

I don't suggest all math based resolutions trump all other methods either, or that a game system has to be as dirt simple as possible for it to be good. This system seems to require you to learn an arbitrary symbolic system but doesn't grant any obvious benefit in experience or ease-of-use to the user - or at least nobody has explained exactly what that is.

Id really like to see a short explanation from FFG explaining exactly why this is a great match for players who want to play a Star Wars game. All that I see is a marketing gimmick so far.

Quote from: CRKrueger;875379Everyone has certain dealbreakers when it comes to RPGs.

Narrative Rules vs. Traditional Rules
Rules Heavy vs. Rules Light
One Book with supplements vs. Multiple Core Rulebooks
Funky Dice vs. Classic Dice
Books vs. Books plus cards/paraphernalia
Class-based vs. Skill-based
Levels vs. No Levels

FFG Star Wars I think just has more deal-breakers than most RPGs.  They start with the Multiple Core Rulebooks approach like the 40k RPG, but add-in Funky Dice, Class-based, and Narrative Rules while being fairly Rules Heavy.  Just more reasons for people to not like the game compared to other mass-market games.

My deal breaker is the funny dice. I understand they are fine, but I don't like them. Reason being (and it's totally just me) is I can't "read" those symbols when reading the rules....they are just annoying. Which is frustrating, because if it weren't for those dice I'd totally be playing the hell out of FFG's Star Wars right now. It seems like a fine system.

I don't know, I think I have some sort of "symbol" dyslexia. It manifests with Runequest 6, too....I hate the weird curlique font it uses where the t blends with other letters in a loop.  Not half as bad as those SW dice symbols, though.


(And nope I do not play those Dicemaster games, for this reason, either; less because they are incomprehensible--they aren't, it's really simple--but more because it is annoying and feels trivial)

EDIT: Read some of the last posts. I wonder if people who have problems with simple math find symbols easier to grasp (or harder)? Players I've known who have issues adding 2 dice usually don't fare better with symbols. I've noticed that symbols work better in very simple mechanical systems....thus why it's fairly common to see symbols in board games and card games, but as soon as the mechanical complexity starts to escalate it seems that the symbols of necessity tend to go away.

Either way my own issue doesn't relate to math vs. symbols...it has to do with language vs. symbols. I'm not prone to enjoying a game that suggests I need to say "You rolled 3 evil empires and your opponent rolled 4 rebel skywalkers so he wins." I don't even know how to linguistically interpret these symbols, let alone convert them in to something comprehensible in the narrative.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;876250I wonder if more people would be buying an FFG D6 Star Wars game instead of what FFG did release? I'm guessing Star Wars fans are buying the FFG game anyway. Game mechanics may not matter that much to them.

I would buy the hell out of a modern update of the D6 system for Star Wars.

Quote from: camazotz;876504EDIT: Read some of the last posts. I wonder if people who have problems with simple math find symbols easier to grasp (or harder)? Players I've known who have issues adding 2 dice usually don't fare better with symbols. I've noticed that symbols work better in very simple mechanical systems....thus why it's fairly common to see symbols in board games and card games, but as soon as the mechanical complexity starts to escalate it seems that the symbols of necessity tend to go away.

Either way my own issue doesn't relate to math vs. symbols...it has to do with language vs. symbols. I'm not prone to enjoying a game that suggests I need to say "You rolled 3 evil empires and your opponent rolled 4 rebel skywalkers so he wins." I don't even know how to linguistically interpret these symbols, let alone convert them in to something comprehensible in the narrative.

As I've noted in a few threads. I have a really hard time with math things. I have an easy time with symbol things. But I there are times when a dice, or any other, gimmick just does not work for me on one level or another.

The benefit of symbols can be that they are not language specific. Which means one less level of translation needed when the symbol represents something other than numbers. But that doesnt quite work in RPGs which are usually heavily language specific till someone translates it.

And in the end you still need to learn and get used to what the symbols mean. And at the end of the day the dice are just fancy ways of doing + vs -. Get more + than -.



And the types of + and - effect the outcome. And so on.

Quote from: Omega;876520As I've noted in a few threads. I have a really hard time with math things. I have an easy time with symbol things. But I there are times when a dice, or any other, gimmick just does not work for me on one level or another.

The benefit of symbols can be that they are not language specific. Which means one less level of translation needed when the symbol represents something other than numbers. But that doesnt quite work in RPGs which are usually heavily language specific till someone translates it.

And in the end you still need to learn and get used to what the symbols mean. And at the end of the day the dice are just fancy ways of doing + vs -. Get more + than -.



And the types of + and - effect the outcome. And so on.

It's like Fudge dice, mixed in with the WEG 'wild die'.