Casting Runes instead of Rolling Dice?

MadCarthos · February 25, 2022, 03:39:31 AM

I am a huge fan of the rune casting that is used in the board games Call To Adventure and even Runebound, although I liked the d20 better in Runebound, 1st edition. Would anyone consider using a system like this in a roleplaying game? Have you tried and what was the result?

On a somewhat related note, I seem to dislike roleplaying games that rely on dice pool as the primary mechanic. I don't think anyone should ever roll more than 6 dice at a time. But if using runes, I could see possibly using more, depending on the situation, but I also feel like that might make me a bit of a hypocrite. Are they different enough to warrant differing opinions?

Mishihari · February 25, 2022, 03:47:06 AM

I'm not familiar with that method. Explanation, please.

Godsmonkey · February 25, 2022, 07:14:18 AM

Quote from: MadCarthos on February 25, 2022, 03:39:31 AM
I am a huge fan of the rune casting that is used in the board games Call To Adventure and even Runebound, although I liked the d20 better in Runebound, 1st edition. Would anyone consider using a system like this in a roleplaying game? Have you tried and what was the result?

On a somewhat related note, I seem to dislike roleplaying games that rely on dice pool as the primary mechanic. I don't think anyone should ever roll more than 6 dice at a time. But if using runes, I could see possibly using more, depending on the situation, but I also feel like that might make me a bit of a hypocrite. Are they different enough to warrant differing opinions?

I've not used runes. However I do have a homebrew western game inspired by Boot Hill that uses playing cards as a dice pool. It does add a unique thematically interesting dynamic to the game that you don't get with dice.

Philotomy Jurament · February 25, 2022, 11:03:50 PM

I have not tried it, but it sounds kinda gimmicky, to me.

To me, the dice are a tool for taking a given probability and determining a result. I prefer for the probabilities to be obvious and clear so that I can use the tool in the most efficient manner, including modifications to the probability and so on. Consequently, I'm not a fan of systems that obscure the probabilities or make them more difficult to reason about.

(This is probably why most of my favorite systems use dice with a linear probability, like rolling a d20 in D&D or rolling d100 in systems like BRP. I find it very easy to think about probabilities in terms of percentages, and those systems make it very easy to do so.)

HappyDaze · February 26, 2022, 12:16:34 AM

Is casting runes something like the FFG Star Wars dice system or playing Dragon Dice?

MadCarthos · February 26, 2022, 12:22:25 AM

Quote from: Mishihari on February 25, 2022, 03:47:06 AM
I'm not familiar with that method. Explanation, please.

I am trying to find a youtube video with a demonstration of the runes, but I can try to describe them. In both Call to Adventure and Runebound 3rd edition, players can resolve challenges or combat by casting runes. These are flat 2-sided cardboard circles or tablets of plastic with symbols on either side. Several runes are cast at once, by shaking them in the hand then throwing them onto a flat surface. (They are basically d2's.) In Call to Adventure, for example, the basic runes have 1 success on one side of the rune, and nothing on the other side. As heroes gain abilities, they gain access to advanced runes that have 1 and 2, or even 1 and 3 successes, allowing them to defeat harder and harder challenges.

Cat the Bounty Smuggler · February 26, 2022, 12:25:11 AM

So these aren't like actual futhark runes?

MadCarthos · February 26, 2022, 02:20:54 AM

Here we go. This is a basic description of the runecasting method in Call to Adventure, even though the tutorial is for one of the game's expansions. Start around 3:04 for the time stamp if you don't want to hear the rest of it.

Mishihari · February 26, 2022, 09:01:51 AM

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament on February 25, 2022, 11:03:50 PM
I have not tried it, but it sounds kinda gimmicky, to me.

To me, the dice are a tool for taking a given probability and determining a result. I prefer for the probabilities to be obvious and clear so that I can use the tool in the most efficient manner, including modifications to the probability and so on. Consequently, I'm not a fan of systems that obscure the probabilities or make them more difficult to reason about.

(This is probably why most of my favorite systems use dice with a linear probability, like rolling a d20 in D&D or rolling d100 in systems like BRP. I find it very easy to think about probabilities in terms of percentages, and those systems make it very easy to do so.)

I have the opposite point of view. Figuring probabilities takes my head right out of the fiction and forcibly reminds me that I'm playing a game. In real life I don't know that I have an 80% of making a jump, just more of a qualitative "really good chance" so that's plenty good enough for in-game. On the other hand, gimmicky probability mechanics can also be distracting from immersion, so they're not necessarily a good thing.

Philotomy Jurament · February 26, 2022, 08:29:02 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on February 26, 2022, 09:01:51 AM
I have the opposite point of view. Figuring probabilities takes my head right out of the fiction and forcibly reminds me that I'm playing a game. In real life I don't know that I have an 80% of making a jump, just more of a qualitative "really good chance" so that's plenty good enough for in-game. On the other hand, gimmicky probability mechanics can also be distracting from immersion, so they're not necessarily a good thing.

Sounds like you're coming at it more from a player's perspective. And I agree with you on that: I don't think players need to be aware of the probabilities in a well-run game. I'm coming at it from the DM's perspective, where determining probabilities (e.g., deciding on modifiers, target numbers, and so on) is a big part of what you do.

hedgehobbit · February 26, 2022, 09:15:21 PM

Quote from: MadCarthos on February 25, 2022, 03:39:31 AMWould anyone consider using a system like this in a roleplaying game? Have you tried and what was the result?

Waaaay back in the day, there was an RPG called Throwing Stones where each player's character was defined by a pool of specialized dice. Each die had a unique set of symbols that represented various things: dodging, disarm, sorcery, etc, and you'd construct your character based on the type of dice you'd include: some dice had combat related symbols while others had magical symbols. Unfortunately for the game, the dice symbols were just printed on and they easily rubbed off. Still, it is an interesting idea for a resolution mechanic that I've never seen used anywhere else.

Mishihari · February 27, 2022, 04:40:15 AM

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament on February 26, 2022, 08:29:02 PM
Quote from: Mishihari on February 26, 2022, 09:01:51 AM
I have the opposite point of view. Figuring probabilities takes my head right out of the fiction and forcibly reminds me that I'm playing a game. In real life I don't know that I have an 80% of making a jump, just more of a qualitative "really good chance" so that's plenty good enough for in-game. On the other hand, gimmicky probability mechanics can also be distracting from immersion, so they're not necessarily a good thing.

Sounds like you're coming at it more from a player's perspective. And I agree with you on that: I don't think players need to be aware of the probabilities in a well-run game. I'm coming at it from the DM's perspective, where determining probabilities (e.g., deciding on modifiers, target numbers, and so on) is a big part of what you do.

You're exactly right that that's my view as a player. As a DM I do figure probabilities, but I have as much time as I need to do it, so it's not too critical that things can be quickly computed. I suppose with a system like this I would come up with a probability table for the results if I wanted to speed things up. I suspect I may not be typical in this regard though. I do various kinds of math for a living so I'm probably more willing to put up with a bit of computation than most.

Null42 · February 27, 2022, 11:16:22 AM

It may be a fun flavor aspect of the game, particularly if you have a Nordic theme.

Let's not forget polyhedral dice were weird once upon a time, and part of the idea of using Zocchi's d7s, d5s, etc. with DCC was to recapture some of that feeling.

There's Everway's tarot-card-like system, which suits the story-based nature of that system well, I think.

Redwanderer · February 28, 2022, 02:41:18 PM

Quote from: MadCarthos on February 25, 2022, 03:39:31 AM
I am a huge fan of the rune casting that is used in the board games Call To Adventure and even Runebound, although I liked the d20 better in Runebound, 1st edition. Would anyone consider using a system like this in a roleplaying game? Have you tried and what was the result?

On a somewhat related note, I seem to dislike roleplaying games that rely on dice pool as the primary mechanic. I don't think anyone should ever roll more than 6 dice at a time. But if using runes, I could see possibly using more, depending on the situation, but I also feel like that might make me a bit of a hypocrite. Are they different enough to warrant differing opinions?

If it does the same thing then what's the difference? You use runes or a Vic 20 computer or dice or a bunch of those spin the arrows things it's all the same.

Now if you did something like flipping cards that took some skill to get a better something, THAT might be fun!

soundchaser · February 28, 2022, 10:58:58 PM

Seek out Fate of the Norns.