Quote from: Lynn;876838Right, and you don't have to buy them from FFG (though I don't think Ive spent $12 on a dice set, with the nice Chessex ones at $6 on Amazon).

They sell the dice in packs. Seen them on racks near the games themselves at the local game store.

They also sell a dice roller app.

On the free side seems theres at least two rollers out now online.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;876874What we are discussing here is whether or not the special dice are delivering a meaningful advantage over the use of traditional dice. My contention is they specifically deliver the following information:

- Success/failure.
- Advantage/threat.
- Triumph or no Triumph.
- Despair or no Despair.

Including quantitative measurements of all four categories (except failures; although the dice can deliver that information, the system ignores it). In addition, the probability of results in each of these categories is independently varied based on skill, difficulty, and circumstantial modifiers.

I then made two statements:

(1) I don't know of any other game that does this.

(2) I could not think of any way to do it with normal dice that wouldn't be considerably more complicated than than the FFG Star Wars core mechanic.

I continue to stand by my first statement. It's certainly possible that there's a game out there delivering information like this, but no one's proffered an example of it yet. (Your blather that opposed rolls with margins of success are doing the same thing is just that: Blather.)

FU and Emergent do simmilar with a single (or more) 6-sider, and double 6-siders respectively (or a 12-sider). Whereas EotE takes up to eight dice to tell the same story? (Fun fact: There is a FU Star Wars.)

The FFG system is more complex.

But. And this is the YMMV part.

It gets the job done. It may not do it well. But it works just fine once you get the hang of it. Id say its no more, or less clunky than Mythic's system with all the bells and whistles in place.

Quote from: Bren;876535Thanks that was helpful. So let's see if I got this.

So match up a * with a funny triangle. Throw those pairs away. Count the sword thingy as a * (but remember you can trade the sword in for a prize in the bottom of the cracker jack box) and count the hollow triangle and circle thingy as a funny triangle thingy (but remember you can trade it in for a worm in somebody's apple). Pair up the sword and hollow thingies like you did with the * and funny triangle thingies and throw any pairs away.

If you have any *s left over you succeed. (Remember swords count as *s.)  If instead you have some funny triangles left over you failed. (Remember that hollow triangle and circle thingies count as triangle thingies.) Decide whether to trade in swords or hollow triangle circle thingies for prizes or worms respectively.

Now see if you have any laurel wreaths and pair them up with any hexagon thingies. Throw those pairs away. If you have any laurel wreaths left you get a present (like at Christmas) even if you failed (apparently Star Wars Santa does not keep a list of bad little boys and girls). If instead you have any hexagon thingies you get threatened by the Star Wars version of the Grinch even if you succeeded. The Grinch hates all boys and girls good or bad.

So instead of doing simple arithmetic we play a matching game and see what's left. OK.

How can anyone look at that and not think this is a horribly and needlessly convoluted mess even without considering the use of symbols instead of numbers and without considering the actual interpretation of roll results.

To understand the dice system in WFRP3 and FFGSW you have to realize the intent.  The idea is that it's not enough for players to derive "drama" and "story" from their character's actions, successes and failures.  The mechanics must do this.  So every mechanical result is always a success or failure, small or large, plus a "narrative kicker" with mechanical weight.  Succeeding or failing at an IC task is not interesting to this school of thought, there must be some form of additional OOC boost to always push drama and story.

This line of reasoning to me is anathema to roleplaying, but there's no doubt that the dice system does what it set out to do.  If you're looking at it as a means of only task resolution, you're looking at it wrong.

The only real flaw I find with either dice system is that coming up with narration for every single "kicker" can be exhausting and simply using the bonus/malus method gets a little much after a while (or as one player put it, "Can't you ever just succeed or fail without some weird hanging modifier?").

Well in WFRP 3 you could skip all the narration and just use the dice symbols as-is. By that I mean only worrying about whether or not you succeeded in your action and, if you had any symbols left over that you could use to trigger any of the effects listed on your action card. (example, spend two "boons" to do an extra maneuver)

I mean, SURE you could look at which dice gave you a success in the end and narrate it: was that last success symbol from one of your fortune Dice (granted by the cleric's buff)? Or was it from your raw attribute dice? Or your skill dice? Conversely, did you fail because of the enemy's ability, or just bad luck (from the Black misfortune dice)?

But you didn't have to. It was fun to think about, for flavor, at times. But in the heat of the moment, when you wanted to maintain momentum, you could just skip that and focus on the dice roll results.

I think WFRP3 did a better job of tying those "hanging modifiers" to additional special effects than SW did, which lets the narrative focus drift into the background.  Unfortunately, the rest of WFRP3 was top to bottom a narrative shitshow of the first order, using a decades old IP born from wargames and traditional RPGs, and so sank into obscurity.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;876874What we are discussing here is whether or not the special dice are delivering a meaningful advantage over the use of traditional dice.

You have pointedly avoided discussing this. Instead you have assumed that there is an advantage.

The main question in the thread is: Should one use the FFG system?  (Specifically dice sets with six symbols of Success, Failure, Advantage, Threat, Triumph, and Despair.

This can be broken down into several questions.

   1. Does the FFG system provide any significant, meaningful advantage when compared to other well understood and commonly used systems?

2. If an advantage exists, is the advantage provided worth the cost in time, money, and effort in play required to obtain the advantage?

3. If an advantage exists, is there some easier system that provides similar advantages?

4. Alternatively does a system that provides fewer or different results then those six: Success/Failure, Advantage/Threat, Triumph, and Despair provide similar advantages to the FFG system at a lower total cost of time, effort, and money?

You have assumed the answer to 1 is yes and have chosen to focus on (and mostly blather about) 3. But you haven't specified what the advantage consists of (other than listing half a dozen nouns).

How does providing all six of the listed nouns deliver a meaningful advantage over providing some other set of information. Especially a set of information from a system that does not have the systemic ambiguities and contradictions that FFG comes with.

A few examples to ponder.

• What are the advantages to obtaining a result like Success+Threat+Despair (other than different words being used)?
• How is Success+Threat+Despair meaningfully different than Success+Threat or than Success+Despair or than Failure+Advantage+Triumph?
• How do these differences provide an advantage in play over an outcome with different or fewer nouns?
• For example, how is Success+Triumph and Success+Advantage meaningfully different from a system that already provides thee levels of Success such as Success/Special Success/Critical Success?

Quote from: CRKrueger;876906This line of reasoning to me is anathema to roleplaying, but there's no doubt that the dice system does what it set out to do.  If you're looking at it as a means of only task resolution, you're looking at it wrong.

Good point. I tend to prefer task resolution since it answers the question I'm most interested in during play. That is, what happened? I tried to hit him, dodge that, persuade her, fix this, outrace that. What happened when I tried to do that?

Telling me that I outraced that, but there is a Threat+Despair+Triumph just leaves me thinking WTF? Now I have to make up some looming threat, some element of despair, and some Triumph. How tiring for every roll.

QuoteThe only real flaw I find with either dice system is that coming up with narration for every single "kicker" can be exhausting and simply using the bonus/malus method gets a little much after a while (or as one player put it, "Can't you ever just succeed or fail without some weird hanging modifier?").

And that complaint argues against there being a significant advantage for providing multiple choices from a list of nouns. But as I've said before, I'm really not the customer FFG is looking for.

Quote from: Necrozius;876909Well in WFRP 3 you could skip all the narration and just use the dice symbols as-is. By that I mean only worrying about whether or not you succeeded in your action and, if you had any symbols left over that you could use to trigger any of the effects listed on your action card. (example, spend two "boons" to do an extra maneuver)

One thing I've noticed on the FFG boards is that the developers and book authors say that they often ignore all the advantage/threat stuff in rolls and only look at the success status. Just to keep the game moving. As the GM has full authority to spend all Threat and Despair, it's within his power (as if that matters) to just ignore those at any time. The Advantage, especially in combat, are most often used to trigger specific things from a chart.

The idea that these values represent some sort of Narrative currency isn't all that present in the actual written rules. For example, in the EotE book, when it talks about Triumphs it says, "Many weapons and talents have side effects that can be triggered using a Triumph result. Otherwise, the scenario or GM may have other options for using Triumph." So the GM, really has not just final say but initial say in what he thinks would be possible with that symbol.

Still, the dice mechanics from Imperial Assault do much of what the RPG does but in a much simpler manner.

Quote from: Lynn;876781Creating a required add-on product that amounts to 20% of a total start up cost of using it (approximately based on USSRP) is a marketing gimmick.

It doesn't seem to be required; alternatives, some fairly cheap, are available. Compare with OD&D; the three booklet set was $10 back when and a set of polyhedral dice easily more than $2 (as I recall) and not many good alternatives then; was that a marketing gimmick?

Quote from: Lynn;876781Creating a required add-on product that amounts to 20% of a total start up cost of using it (approximately based on USSRP) is a marketing gimmick.

Well thank god DnD is fully playable with just the players guide.  Totally don't need a monster manuel or DMG.

Quote from: Bren;876928You have pointedly avoided discussing this. Instead you have assumed that there is an advantage.

Bren, you keep wanting to have a discussion with some imaginary version of Justin Alexander that you've created in your head.

The discussion that the actual Justin Alexander is having here is entirely about Lynn's query about whether or not the specialized dice by FFG have an advantage in terms of ease-of-use compared to using standard dice.

Period. That's it. As I've stated multiple times, the total extent of my claim was that I feel the specialized dice do, in fact, make it easier to generate the four-axis results of the FFG system (including factors of variability) than a system using normal dice would.

I, honestly, don't give a shit if you like the four-axis results or not. A lot of people do, so your repeated claims that nobody could ever want them are kind of silly. Personally, I don't (as I've also stated multiple times now), so the fact that you keep trying to paint me as somehow championing the system is ludicrously stupid on your part.

Quote from: Omega;876882FU and Emergent do simmilar with a single (or more) 6-sider, and double 6-siders respectively (or a 12-sider).

That sounds unlikely, but I'm interested in how these games are producing four-axis results on a single six-sider. I've asked you for an explanation of these mechanics you keep claiming exist before and you've refused to provide them. Will you provide one this time?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;877203The discussion that the actual Justin Alexander is having here is entirely about Lynn's query about whether or not the specialized dice by FFG have an advantage in terms of ease-of-use compared to using standard dice.

If you want to maintain a laser-like focus exclusive of any other issues or topics in a discussion occurring in a public forum you shouldn't  repeatedly claim that the "entire topic of conversation" is only whatever splinter of a multi-page thread that happens to interest you. In this thread you decided to reply to my posts. Now it shouldn't surprise you to learn that my posts are made about what attracts my interest. This is a forum discussion, it isn't your personal blog. You don't get to limit the topic of discussion to only what interests Jason.

As far as the 3 or 4 axes of information FFG provides, the FFG system isn't doing anything substantially different than what was already done by symbol dice such as Rory's Story Cubes. Roll some dice, look at the symbols on the dice, try to tell a story based on the symbols. FFG chose to limit the number of symbols to 6 instead of the 54 symbols in the basic Story Cube set. The mechanical cancellation of successes and failures is an add-on to what the Story Cubes do, but hardly an innovative one.

Quote from: Bren;876932Telling me that I outraced that, but there is a Threat+Despair+Triumph just leaves me thinking WTF? Now I have to make up some looming threat, some element of despair, and some Triumph. How tiring for every roll.

Part of me likes this, but only if wasn't so common. I love Crits and Fumbles, but if those each have a 5% chance to show, then 9 out of 10 rolls happen without these special events. For me that works.

What's the math on these special modifiers in Star Wars?

AKA, how many times in 10 rolls will you encounter Threat / Despair / Triumph occurring?

Quote from: Warboss Squee;877179Well thank god DnD is fully playable with just the players guide.  Totally don't need a monster manuel or DMG.

The players dont need either. The DM technically doesnt need the PHB. And lets not forget that you only need one copy of those three books and the dice for everyone to play.

5e example. I am the only group member with the books. Oh noes! No one else can play! yeah riiight. (and 5e is structured such that you can actually play with just the PHB. Limited. But playable.)

FFG SW is all in one book for the most part. I dont know how essential the stuff in the expansions is. I assume not very?