What is your preferred dice rolling system besides d100 and d20?
I don't like d20 because almost everything has above 10 to hit or succeed, effectively making at least half of the die useless in most situations and thus turning into a coinflip.
What is your preferred dice rolling system besides d100 and d20?
This one. I adapted it to a GMd game.
interesting system.
reminds me of how Ironsworn does 1d6+mods vs 2d10 for miss/weak hit/strong hit (and modify scene when d10 roll same number)
This seems more like solo play. Is it any good with multiple people?
what the hell is this system?? are you trowing handfuls of coins and counting heads?
YZE d66 tables look good. got any more d66 tables?
>Is it any good with multiple people?
I've played the fantasy version by the same guy as a gmless game (how he wrote it) and it was good, but like most gmless games it really hinges on people being ready to have bad things happen to their own characters. If you are too precious about your character to put them in danger, their story becomes a very dull one. We quickly developed a sort of undefined standard that if you are shooting for a dramatic outcome your possible dangers should be comparable. One game I played a seer that blinded myself with divine power on my first roll of the game, and basically chose "save everyone from the dungeon collapse" and "die in the process of trying" as the outcomes for my final roll.
I've also run it as a GM, where I let players define their outcome and then tell them the danger, and if they don't like the danger they can scale down their goal for a less significant danger. Obviously this requires your players to trust you so it's not a game for people who want it to be a competition. It's great for a short game, because every roll changes the game by giving you hints about what the powerful entity pulling the strings of the story wants.
For me, it's 35d2 − 42.
Whoops, forgot file.
So the average roll is 20.5, and the minimum is -7? That really confudles my noodles.
35d2 − 42 is a more faithful rendition of the same normal distribution that 3d6 imitates. A true normal distribution can go all the way out to ±infinity.
I don't want to add up 35 fricking dice and then do a two digit subtraction to figure out what my roll is every time I need to do something. Awful.
>the average roll is 20.5
try again.
he's right, dumbass.
(35 to 70) - 42 = -7 to 28.
the average is (-7 + 28) / 2 = 21 / 2 = 10.5
>dumbass
Next time and every time from now when you get triggered
Close your eyes.
Breath deeply for one minute.
Think if maybe, just maybe, you're the one who's wrong and you didn't understand what the other person said, and you don't need to be triggered.
Because there's a good chance that then, like now, that will be exactly the case.
>he's right
>10.5
About that...
>
>>the average roll is 20.5
If you still can't see it. Get glasses and if those don't work get tested for dyscalculia or dyslexia.
sorry, he said 10.5. you're the one that needs an eye exam.
1d6+7dF+7 for me, if I want a similar curve. You can easily adjust the curve shape without changing the overall range or average, too
Check out 1d4+8df+8, or 1d10+5df+5.
If you cannot math (or want to save the effort/time), use anydice. It will do the dice math for you. That is it's purpose.
https://anydice.com/program/34fdf
And really, once you get a good distribution, just make a mobile dice roller app do it for you and call it a day. Everyone has a phone.
>If you cannot math (or want to save the effort/time), use anydice
If that's directed at me and isn't just general advice, I can do the simple maths like in the example given thank you. That's why I pointed out the error in the first place. I also did more elegantly than
.
Gaslight harder bud.
wym? you didn't do any math in your post.
I did it in my head. I didn't post the answer so the person who wrote 20.5 wrong could have the satisfaction of discovering their own error, whether mathematical or typographical.
Good to know, thanks.
you didn't do it more elegantly then.
As you're not privy to the knowledge of what method I used not only is that a ridiculous claim to make on the face of it but it's also quite wrong.
Though I don't use it often, I like it for those reasons too.
you didn't do it more elegantly then.
I still prefer anydice though, personally. While I can do the math, I can't do it for every value in the range and then graph it visually in a matter of seconds, or similarly compare several different dice options simultaneously in a few seconds.
>if that's directed at me
I tagged the wrong person. Meant to tag
who thought the average was 20.5.
I like d20 and d6 systems. The games that have tried to do different have tried to do different. And that fact made them suck ass.
stopwatch milliseconds for d100
Milliseconds are thousandths of a second. There are one thousand of them in a second. Not one hundred.
That's irrelevant though. You can just ignore the last digit, and any digit more than 1s. It's a pretty quick d100.
No. No there's no possible way anyone actually uses the metric system to measure time
>t. Has never used a stopwatch.
This is how computers make random numbers.
That's one way. Sometimes they hash an entire date time. Another way is to do like random.org and record white noise and sample that.
>Not using quantum decay to generate a truly random number
Never gonna make it
>he still thinks quantum physics are random
Your best bet is to go with a public randomness beacon, because randomness is an illusion, and it takes human beings to maintain an illusion.
>needing randomness
Say what your character does and I will tell you the result.
If I'm designing a game from scratch: Fate / fudge dice. -4 to +4, on a curved distribution.
If I'm picking one that exists:
GURPS style 3d6 roll under with many spelled out modifiers, and explicit mechanics for group checks and extended checks.
I can be fine with a d20 with a large scale of total bonuses (-5 to +70 is good), explicit menchmarks and circumstance mods, the take 10 / take 20 rules, special rules for group checks, fail by / succeed by 5 rules. IE 3e, paying attention to the rules, with some optional rules and a couple things cribbed from FantasyCraft.
The main thing is you should handle degrees of success, explicitly specify the difficulties, handle group checks and extended checks, and assume the normal use is in combat/car chases/while being shot at, and either give a massive competence bonus or a take10 rule for outside combat.
Each skill should take 1-2 pages of rules.
d6s dice pool like YZE
i just cut out the middle man and use coins
I really, really, like storyteller system dice pools of d10s. I like how they're individually decided, it immediately tells you how capable someone is (more capable people almost always succeed with a success but are also able to succeed with really high success), I like how that the two numbers we affect actually CHANGE the distribution instead of moving it.
Being better at something doesn't move the mean, it literally changes the distribution of outcomes.
It's also really satisfying in my experience. No other method satisfies my brain quite as much. It's also super easy to determine outcomes since you just count up the number of successes.
What I mean by the two numbers, most games, in my experience, simply change the same number, the success threshold/DC you're either adding to the DC as a DM by determining difficulty or your subtracting from it as a player. This doesn't really change anything, although it does make things simple. A very highly skilled PC in these systems is simply really good at most tasks but struggles to ever have a massive success on a really hard DC.
With dots/dicepool systems, being better at a skill doesn't change DCs, that's not what you're fighting against, it literally changes the distribution you are rolling AND changes the type of outcomes possible. You could never get 2 successes at Driving until you had the right number of dots in it.
I find that really satisfying. I also find it really easy to set DCs when running, since it's just like weighting coin flips one way or the other. Other systems, like D20 or D100 you're also just weighting coin flips, but more granularly so it's hard for me to get an idea of how much better or harder things really are AND it's just one coinflip too. Multiple d6 systems are similar but now my coinflip is following a normal distribution further making it hard for me to tell how much harder a skill check is.
>effectively making at least half of the die useless in most situations and thus turning into a coinflip
So it isn't the D20's inherent properties you dislike, but how D&D and D&D-likes handle it.
I have an unhealthy obsession with the d6 and try to shoehorn it into all situations
T. Robin D Laws.
Favorite: Legends of The Wulin's complicated bullshit
Second Place: Just roll 2d6, beat a flat number and move on
2d6, or d6 dice pools. Both are peak.
Genesys.
The narrative symbol resolution system is kino and has produced some of the best games I ever played. It's my go to system when running anything.
One of the worst systems of all time.
>I don't like the D20 because I've only been exposed to one way of using it and refuse to use my own agency to find other ways to use it
name 5 different systems that use the d20 for something other than roll over/under as a main mechanic
What does this have to do with the point?
And, if you decide to answer, keep in mind that this hobby revolves around doing what you want and being expected to rewrite systems you don't like.
But I'm willing to bet this post will get one of the following:
>ignored
>further moronic deflection that has nothing to do with the point
>included in a mass reply that has nothing to do with the point
>ignored
>further moronic deflection that has nothing to do with the point
like you're doing?
>included in a mass reply that has nothing to do with the point
lmao ok moron. here's your dedicated reply.
What systems, and how, have you rewritten the resolution systems to to make the d20 better than a roll under/over X?
>no u
Asking what relevance your post has to the point is neither ignoring nor deflection, it is a direct engagement to see what the frick you said had to do with what I was saying.
Fricking nitwit.
>b-but how do you d-do something other than b-binary over/under pass-fail
By researching probability.
When all the homosexuals who had to defend D&D 5e told me to rewrite what I didn't like, they never taught me how; I had to learn myself.
So either do some research or shut your face, but don't just sit there and say the D20 can only do one thing just because you've only ever seen it used that one way.
the point is in the op you moron. what other mechanics does the d20 use other than roll over/under X that make it fun? What alternatives have other fa/tg/uys tried?
>told me to rewrite what I didn't like, they never taught me how; I had to learn myself.
boohoo, Black person. Keep your homosexualry to yourself and out of my thread if you're not going to share.
The moronic homosexual OP made a false statement.
Do your research, like everyone else has to, or frick off.
NTAYRT but even 3.0 / 3.5 has more than basic b***h pass fail. Succeed / Fail by 5 are common. You also don't 'mostly roll against DC10' as OP described, and it clearly marks the DCs that scale up past 50 and there are some clearly spelled out circumstances where you just don't roll.
OPs complaint only really applies to 5e and 5e derivatives.
I'm going to chew on this one but I don't think I can do it. Even the main alternative, dicepools where you count success, even that's based on a series of roll-over/unders. There's lots of weird stuff you could theoretically do, "count the number of 3s that you rolled", but then you'll wish you were using a smaller die. And even then you'll probably want the main mechanic to be some kind of roll-over/under with the 'weird stuff' as spice.
I think that the boring part, which OP was complaining about, is that the target number tends to be around 10.
If you want to be a pedantic reductionist, every dice system boils down to roll under or roll over. Dumbass.
nope, not all.
A dice system that has you roll within a set of ranges is neither over nor under.
Maybe what we should do is stop pretending that OP meant "I am president of the icosohedra hate club" and not "I dislike the dice mechanic of dungeons and dragons from 3rd edition onward".
Like I get that just saying d20 to refer to a specific system that uses that die type is maybe a bit dumb, but pretending in the context of dice based conflict resolution systems that "d20" refers to geometry is a just as dumb.
I could design 5 dice systems using a d20 right now and none of them would be d&d (note: not suggesting they would all be good).
Maybe you should take that ribbed dildo out of your ass and realize clarity of speech is important to effective communication.
Maybe you shouldn't misinterpret people on purpose for the sake of starting arguments on an imageboard.
Dice pools of nearly any kind.
d12 is the best dice.
I prefer the humble d6 for several reasons. First is just availability since everyone and their mother has some d6. As long as you’re not trying to get a percentage-based result, a d6 can probably do what you need.
I personally like 2d6’s because the bell curve models effort really well. I like the idea within d20 systems that a person always has a *chance* of failing, but with a d20 that chance is 4% and with 2d6 it’s only 2.7%. Plus you’re just more likely to get a middling result than a really good or really bad result. You can do the same on a d20 but it’s more natural on 2d6 since you can base every challenge around 7 as the average as opposed to a d20 where you have to start specifying ranges of numbers if you want to take advantage of probabilities.
D6 is also great for matching numbers. According to One Roll Engine, 4d10 has about a 50% chance of rolling a match, but rolling for matches works great with d6’s. What’s better is that you can use probabilities to your advantage. Maybe you play a game where matches mean you fail.
I’d make a roleplaying game where over the course of a round the player has to navigate situations, and problems add to the pool of dice that they have to roll by the end of the round, and if they roll a match, something bad happens.
Ah, the humble d6.
>I don't like d20 because almost everything has above 10 to hit or succeed, effectively making at least half of the die useless in most situations and thus turning into a coinflip.
That is the most moronic thing I've read all month.
Dice pools counting successes just feels the most satisfying. Specific dice used don't matter that much
I have always found this to be the least satisfying mechanic. Especially if you're trying to roll under your stat or some other static target number. I recognize that it can be a good elegant mechanic depending on what you're trying to do, it's just weirdly unsatisfying. When I roll multiple dice I want to add them up or write them all down, I want every result to count somehow. I can roll an 19 when I only needed 10 and that's fine, or role a 1 when I needed 10 and that's fine, but if I'm rolling a pool of dice and I succeed on a 4 then somehow all the 1s, 2s and 3s feel pointless, and so do the 5s and 6s.
every result does count. either it's a success or it isn't. the more successes, the better the result.
That's not a d20 thing, that's a bounded-accuracy-with-rubber-band-challenges sort of thing. You're supposed to have higher or lower odds depending on what you're doing, and there are supposed to be trade-offs, where (depending your your build) you might be 5% or 10% less effective but have other perks to compensate.
Unironically you could improve on 5e by using coin flips instead of d20 rolls. Not that coin flips are the best resolution mechanic for any game, but they're the best resolution mechanic for the game that 5e is trying to be.
d100 roll-under is objectively the best system every designed for a ttrpg and anyone who disagrees is dumb and wrong and stupid and dumb.
2d10 in place of d20s in systems that use it for the more consistent rolls.
3d6+modifier roll over for skills and d6 pools with a 5-6 success range for combat.
---10s digit determines success. 10-20 is success, 1-9 is failure, 1s digit is used for something else. I will pedantically insist that this is different from "roll over target number".
---Write down a number of success points equal to your roll. Most tasks require multiple rolls to achieve success (i.e, "Keep trying until you have 50 total", this may or may not include efforts from multiple characters and may or may not include bonuses to the rolls). I will pedantically insist that this is different from "roll over target number".
---Odd numbers mean success, prime numbers mean critical success, even numbers mean failure and the GM writes down a number of complication-points equal to the roll.
---Roll X d20, you succeed if 2 die come up with the same result. My moron-math suggests that you should probably be rolling at least 10d20, it would be easier with smaller die, but maybe you like rolling 10d20 and looking for matches.
---A natural 13 means that you achieve your desired outcome. You can spend effort-points to add or subtract from your natural roll to get to 13. Over 13 represents an unwanted complication resulting from your efforts, under 13 means that your efforts just weren't enough.
I tried.
bit all over the place
lol, I was replying to
and the related posts.
I usually waive away tests where most of the party has >50% chance of success. At least when there's no hurry or a reasonable consequence for fricking up. From the outside it looks like inflated DCs, but it cuts down pointless derailments and rolls for rolls' sake hard.
Alternative mechanics:
2d6, like in Traveller.
Dice pools, like in WoD or Shadowrun are good too.
The one in Deadlands is pretty fun, too, but doesn't hold candle to a humble d100 roll-under.
Why nobody talk about diceless systems?
they suck
I'm a really dumb guy and cannot math to save my life. Is there theory behind the best dice to use in a game?
If you're rolling a lot, something with a curved distribution like GURPS or fudge gives you results that feel consistent with your characters abilities. The falloff in likelihood of the more extreme rolls also makes the distribution of levels of success feel more satisfying.
A flat distribution like you get from a single die (like a d20 or d100) feels really swingy, but if all the roll is telling you is "pass / fail" the odds are easy to understand.
That's the dice. The specifics, like
>bonus size relative to dice size.
>plain fiat difficulties vs big list of examples the player can plan around
>circumstances that let you make plans where they just work without you rolling (take10, take20)
>whether you can stack bonuses to get out of rolling.
>how group checks are handled
Are at least as important as your main dice mechanic.
D20 roll under is solid. Not as much a fan of D20+mods vs TN.
That said, modifier economy being poorly managed isn't really the fault of the D20.
I like the idea of triangular die roll. You roll 3 dice and sort them, then take the middle. It gives a curve fitted to the actual die used and involves minimal math. Works well with roll under.
https://anydice.com/program/34fe1
Some random options to replace a d20. The d4 base gives you a pretty tight range.
For me, it's D12 dice pool systems with a variable target number depending on the difficulty of the action and varying degrees of success based on the number of hits.
Almost there buddy. It's d12 dice pools with the pool being your two attributes you are using and the target number being 12-your skill in the current task. The number of successes you need is the difficulty. Margin of success is the difference between the difficulty and how many successes you achieved.
Try it out, it makes more sense mathematically than what you are proposing. I'm going to use this for my game but with d6s, scraped the d12s idea because I'm not going to use skills anyway so I don't need that much granularity. Going to use TN 4 for things you are trained and skilled, and TN 5, 6, 6*, 6**, etc, for things you are progressively less familiar with, based on what careers you have.
Just roll any bunch of dice whatsoever and the DM arbitrates the outcome based on feels.
>roll seems high
Success
>roll seems low
Fail
>roll is all 1s
Fumble, lockpick breaks and permanently jams the lock, whatever
>manage to roll 1 2 3 4 etc
Perfect hit, instant decapitation or similar
>any dice falls off table
You trip and fall
Etc.
damn imagine being moronic
Do you really need to imagine?
i like the shape and feel of d12's
2d6
3d6
and d6 dicepools