[Age Past] Up on Kickstarter LIVE!
Locke:
http://upload.dirdim.com/upload/agepast/pdf125/Age_Past_v125_small.20110607-0011.pdf
Here's the new link sorry about the broken one. It can also be found in my sig. Enjoy and I appreciate feedback!
Jeff
Mike Sugarbaker:
+2 for doubles changes the game a bit, but, well, I suck at statistics but I can code a little, so I did some Monte Carlo simulations. For basically any number of dice in the pool, the bell curve of results is centered on 10, with a big divot at 11, then the rest of the bell curve picking up at normal with 12 and flattening out. It almost never reaches 16 and never goes higher. It never really goes lower than 3 unless you're rolling a small number of dice (say, 3).
So yeah, generally, it is always a better deal to not roll dice and take a guaranteed +1 instead to whatever your best result happens to be. Given that... I know you place some value on having an innovative die mechanic, but what does innovation really count for if it doesn't make a difference at the table? It's just forcing someone to learn something for no real reason.
You could get essentially the same mechanical effect as an Elegant10 roll by rolling, say, 2d6 to make it a little bit bell-curvy (or if you're married to d10s, roll 2 and subtract the high one from the low one), then adding your stat.
There's no real reason to value innovation in the die mechanic in particular. Innovation can happen in lots of places in a game's design, and IMO most of them have bigger upside.
Locke:
Quote from: Mike Sugarbaker on June 22, 2011, 07:54:52 PM
+2 for doubles changes the game a bit, but, well, I suck at statistics but I can code a little, so I did some Monte Carlo simulations. For basically any number of dice in the pool, the bell curve of results is centered on 10, with a big divot at 11, then the rest of the bell curve picking up at normal with 12 and flattening out. It almost never reaches 16 and never goes higher. It never really goes lower than 3 unless you're rolling a small number of dice (say, 3).
So yeah, generally, it is always a better deal to not roll dice and take a guaranteed +1 instead to whatever your best result happens to be. Given that... I know you place some value on having an innovative die mechanic, but what does innovation really count for if it doesn't make a difference at the table? It's just forcing someone to learn something for no real reason.
You could get essentially the same mechanical effect as an Elegant10 roll by rolling, say, 2d6 to make it a little bit bell-curvy (or if you're married to d10s, roll 2 and subtract the high one from the low one), then adding your stat.
There's no real reason to value innovation in the die mechanic in particular. Innovation can happen in lots of places in a game's design, and IMO most of them have bigger upside.
Yes I agree that the system could be called elegant6 or elegant8. Here's what I like about the rolling system:
1. its quick at add and scales well at high levels
2. the players can choose how they roll and while this isn't as innovative players do like the choice I've found in play testing
3. the system leverages potential. in D20 a +8 is just potential it doesn't mean the PC is good. If the PC only ever rolls natural 1's then the + doesn't matter as the character isn't performing and therefore sucks. There is an old saying in football "you are only as good as your record". With the bell curve you get a BELL CURVE hence potential is non-existent and the PC just performs. Yes the "1's" thing isn't he best example but I player Pathfinder a few weeks ago and rolled an average score of about 6 or 7 over 20 rolls the character didn't perform and it wasn't fun.
4. the system has just enough inherent instability to increase the randomness to make it fun and not too predictable.
I agree that rolling is rolling, but PC's are suppose to perform and do what they are good at with some regularity. The risk plays in it as well since most rolls are opposed, if a monster gets a high score the player has to choose between trying to defend and avoid a critical hit by rolling too low.
I believe that the dice mechanic integrates into the game and the global design effect is very innovative. But technically I guess you are right rolling is rolling is rolling... you get scores and check them against a task. If you only do this its just a die mechanic, but Age Past takes it further.
Locke:
30 Days left on the Kickstarter. Tell your friends and take the time to think about backing the game on Kickstarter!
http://kck.st/jNe0rJ
thanks!
Jeff
John Michael Crovis:
My opinion from skimming your game system.... I like the dice mechanic and the morality mechanic. Good stuff. I wish the morality mechanic would appear sooner in the book. I don't like point based character creation, and I think the majority of the setting information should be pushed to the back of the book and leave only a brief summary at the beginning. The intro touts this as a great book for beginners... but it isn't. I'm not saying its a bad RPG, but from a beginners stand-point, this is complicated stuff! The art, so far, ranges from being fantastic to so-so...
Would I play it? From what I can tell, this is just another flavor a D&D. I've pretty much settled on Pathfinder/3.5 as my favorite version of D&D, so I am not too keen on trying another version right now. Sorry.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page