Quote from: gamerGoyf;690127but I digress let's talk about dice, at what point do dice mechanics become too complicated in your opinion

I don't think complexity is necessarily the issue, so much as novelty for the sake of novelty or elevating dice-play over roleplaying.

Quote from: trechriron;690135You don't like these mechanics. You refer to them as SDTs in a derogatory manner.

No, you've completely missed the point. 'Stupid _________ tricks' is a humorous, self-deprecating label.

That lion-tamer stuff is just nonsense.

Quote from: trechriron;690135Just because I'm calling out your obvious trolling thread . . .

Disagreement != trolling.

Quote from: trechriron;690135. . . as such, does not mean I need protection from your trolling thread. I'm in here posting in it, yes?

Yes, you posted in this thread, first to actually engage the subject, which I appreciate, and then to complain that this site doesn't offer the same veneer of moderator-enforced faux-civility as other roleplaying game forums, which is just an enormous thread-crap.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;690131I don't even know any more.

I do, and I want to thank those who actually engaged the topic, instead of using the thread as an excuse to complain about my tone or the tone of the site, or to make up bullshit never said.

I think I've said all I have to say on this subject. Moving on.

Quote from: Haffrung;690094Yep. I pointed out a while ago that this site has become little more than a bitchy Dragonsfoot.

This sort of thing can be seen just about anywhere, where there's a significant concentration of "get off my lawn" types.  :rant:

Whether it is an online message board, a local watering hole, live radio call in shows, "letters to the editor" pages, etc ...

Quote from: Black Vulmea;690088As the original coiner of the phrase 'stupid dice tricks,' I'm in a unique position to tell you the precise origin of the usage.

You did that? I heard that term first from James Wallis, at a Gen Con around the publication of 3e.
He used it in an interview on Ogrecave (cached version as the site seems to be offline?).
(That interview was published between 2000 and 2001, before DeProfundis and WHFRP1 Realms of Sorcery.)


A stupid dice trick is only stupid if it is more complicated than necessary and opaque so that nothing is gained. (The bidding in DitV is such a case.)

The most prominent stupid dice thrick in Germany is the skill check of Das Schwarze Auge: Each skill is based on three attributes, like this:
   Climbing (STR/STR/DEX)
To climb a tree a character has to succeed at three attribute tests (roll under with d20). A skill rank is noted like that:
   Climbing (STR/STR/DEX) 7
meaning that you have a total of 7 points that you are allowed to fail any or all checks by.
This is one of the least intuitive mechanisms that I know. The skill rank alone says nothing about the competence of the character; a rank of 10 is still abysmal if the three tested stats are only 8, and a rank of 1 is still good if your stats are 18. (Purely theoretical numbers, I don't know how realistic an attribute of 18 is.)
A player can't easily gauge the % chance of three consecutive d20 rolls versus different targets (or even the same target) - add in ranks and you are lost forever.

Holy shit, David Letterman-esque spin off joke comment ninja'ed from an old Gen Con -- with citation!

With that I think the circle is complete. Thank you Dirk, your work here is done. Now someone fetch me a fainting couch, I feel positively giddy!

:cool:

(hush! the soufflé must now rest. give it time to rise, so no premature necro-posting...)

I have done quite a bit of game mechanic design, and I often catch myself overengineering things. When I don't realize I have screwed up, it can be very helpful to me anyway, for another person to say "Stop...you are doing it wrong"

You can't satisfy everyone though, in regards to desired level of detail.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;690207A stupid dice trick is only stupid if it is more complicated than necessary and opaque so that nothing is gained. (The bidding in DitV is such a case.)

The most prominent stupid dice thrick in Germany is the skill check of Das Schwarze Auge: Each skill is based on three attributes, like this:
   Climbing (STR/STR/DEX)
To climb a tree a character has to succeed at three attribute tests (roll under with d20). A skill rank is noted like that:
   Climbing (STR/STR/DEX) 7
meaning that you have a total of 7 points that you are allowed to fail any or all checks by.
This is one of the least intuitive mechanisms that I know. The skill rank alone says nothing about the competence of the character; a rank of 10 is still abysmal if the three tested stats are only 8, and a rank of 1 is still good if your stats are 18. (Purely theoretical numbers, I don't know how realistic an attribute of 18 is.)
A player can't easily gauge the % chance of three consecutive d20 rolls versus different targets (or even the same target) - add in ranks and you are lost forever.

Oh wow. What a terrific example of dice wanking. Thanks.

I don't mind new dice mechanics, but when complication is added by them just for the sake of being different then they aren't useful.

There are games I like that feature novelty dice tricks that would still be great without them. DCC comes to mind. The game is good enough to be interesting without all the weird sided dice.

The first thing I think of when looking at a new gimmick mechanic is, can I come up with a simpler way of producing the same results in a short time? If the answer is yes then the rest of the game gets looked at with a more critical eye, because usually, novelty for its own sake is an attempt to hide the absence of substantial content.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;690220Oh wow. What a terrific example of dice wanking. Thanks.

I don't mind new dice mechanics, but when complication is added by them just for the sake of being different then they aren't useful.

There are games I like that feature novelty dice tricks that would still be great without them. DCC comes to mind. The game is good enough to be interesting without all the weird sided dice.

The first thing I think of when looking at a new gimmick mechanic is, can I come up with a simpler way of producing the same results in a short time? If the answer is yes then the rest of the game gets looked at with a more critical eye, because usually, novelty for its own sake is an attempt to hide the absence of substantial content.

As a mental exercise I am curious what the theory behind that mechanic is.

Here goes : They are trying to mitigate 'one uber stat' dominating rolls.
With two or three stats represented, and 3 rolls needed to succeed, it 'averages out' things.

That's all I got.

My suspicion with DCC was they were deliberately trying to recreate that situation in the dawn of gaming when the dice used were strange and hard to come by outside of mail-order, and seemed like odd, magical things adding to the experience of exploring of a strange new world of perilous adventure and strange sorceries.

Quote from: TristramEvans;690226My suspicion with DCC was they were deliberately trying to recreate that situation in the dawn of gaming when the dice used were strange and hard to come by outside of mail-order, and seemed like odd, magical things adding to the experience of exploring of a strange new world of perilous adventure and strange sorceries.

Yeah. The problem is that its not 1974 anymore and polyhedrons are no longer the wonderous magical objects that they once were. You can't put that experience back in the box.

The game has a cool vibe and would play just as well without them.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;690229Yeah. The problem is that its not 1974 anymore and polyhedrons are no longer the wonderous magical objects that they once were. You can't put that experience back in the box.

The game has a cool vibe and would play just as well without them.

And I admit that this next bit may matter to nobody else but myself.

If you include a stupid dice trick, and it is exclusionary instead of inclusionary to playing the game, then it is an automatic failure. Case in point, the special dice used by FFG's version of the Star Wars RPG. You need specialized dice to play the game, and that is a barrier to entry for that game. It does not help the RPG industry because while it makes more profit for the individual company, it also gives the buyer one more pause to not purchase the game. It does not help the hobby, because it makes games in general seem to be much more insular than they actually are with a major intellectual property.

Quote from: jeff37923;690235And I admit that this next bit may matter to nobody else but myself.

If you include a stupid dice trick, and it is exclusionary instead of inclusionary to playing the game, then it is an automatic failure. Case in point, the special dice used by FFG's version of the Star Wars RPG. You need specialized dice to play the game, and that is a barrier to entry for that game. It does not help the RPG industry because while it makes more profit for the individual company, it also gives the buyer one more pause to not purchase the game. It does not help the hobby, because it makes games in general seem to be much more insular than they actually are with a major intellectual property.

The trend of being over-gimmicky and full of exclusive bits is a simple reaction to the realization that rpg players don't really need that much product to enjoys years of entertainment. Its what keeps the industry from becoming the huge cash cow that some companies are trying to turn it into.

WHFRP 3E did the same thing. Tons of unique fiddly bits included largely just to prevent piracy. These types of publishing tricks just show us that some game companies don't really give a shit about roleplaying, only about how to turn the biggest buck from IP in the roleplaying market.

Quote from: CRKrueger;690165That's like saying hiring a plumber is reactionary because he's going to return your bathroom to the state of shit being in the toilet and not all over the floor.

Interesting observation, considering RPG.net is more moderated than it used to be, and there used to be a helluva lot of shit getting flung around everywhere  on any given day. Now theRPGsite is deliberately avoiding moderation in reaction to RPG.net's policies, and guess what? There's shit all over the place, and it stinks.

Not that I don't enjoy stopping by occasionally, but I have to type my posts with one hand because I'm holding my nose with the other.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;690241Interesting observation, considering RPG.net is more moderated than it used to be, and there used to be a helluva lot of shit getting flung around everywhere  on any given day. Now theRPGsite is deliberately avoiding moderation in reaction to RPG.net's policies, and guess what? There's shit all over the place, and it stinks.

Not that I don't enjoy stopping by occasionally, but I have to type my posts with one hand because I'm holding my nose with the other.

So go post on TBP and enjoy the moderation that keeps the place free of shit, or meaningful discussion.

I'm interested in DCC but two things keep me from buying it:

1. The PDF is $25.

2. The dice.

Quote from: jeff37923;690235Case in point, the special dice used by FFG's version of the Star Wars RPG. You need specialized dice to play the game, and that is a barrier to entry for that game.

How are they required?  Most 'specialty dice' I've seen may have different symbols, but they seem to have normal number of sides.  

For example, JAM dice in Warhammer 40k are a 6 sided dice that has 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, Jam (I think - I haven't used them in a long time).  

But they could just as easily be represented by 1=1, 2=2, 3=3, 4=1, 5=2, 6=JAM.  Mapping the values can be a little more complex, but if you know what the original dice has on the faces, recreating it isn't hard.

Actually, substituting any die in for another isn't THAT hard, but it does take some thought.  For example, if all I have is a d6 and I want to represent a d20, I can do it with 3 rolls.  First roll 1-3= 1-10, 4-6=11-20; Second roll 1-3 = 1-5 or 11-15, 4-6 = 6-10 or 16-20.  Finally, roll again (ignore 6).  

Using a d6 in place of a d20 wouldn't be a good system (it'd be a stupid dice trick) but there are times when it has value as a SUBSTITUTE.