After I read at some places in this forum, that some posters consider the d6 to be intrinsically tied to Shadowrun, I wanted to poll how sizable of a majority that is, if it is a majority at all.
Would you accept a different Dice Mechanic, if it worked better/faster/stronger than multiple d6 does?
I think Shadowrun is well enough defined through an extremely unique and zany setting,
and restricting it to a possibly sub-par game-mechanic out of nostalgia is a bad move in my opinion,
so I vote for 'Whatever, man!', but let me see your opinions.
Full Version: Shadowrun Dice Mechanic
Shadowrun is tied to the d6. It was a deliberate design choice as I recall, they were trying to distance themselves from the dice rainbow that is/was D&D. That was around the time when a unified dice mechanic started to become popular-- even D&D went that way eventually.
That said, some things you don't want to mess with. If they tried making D&D without multiple dice, or even relying on something other than the d20, they'd have a fan rebellion. In fact, there are several D&D ports out there, such as Dungeon World: good systems, but they don't scratch the same itch as D&D. Shadowrun has a few ports that I'm aware of-- a few for Savage Worlds, and the Sixth World project for FATE-- but they're in no danger of overtaking Shadowrun.
That said, some things you don't want to mess with. If they tried making D&D without multiple dice, or even relying on something other than the d20, they'd have a fan rebellion. In fact, there are several D&D ports out there, such as Dungeon World: good systems, but they don't scratch the same itch as D&D. Shadowrun has a few ports that I'm aware of-- a few for Savage Worlds, and the Sixth World project for FATE-- but they're in no danger of overtaking Shadowrun.
I had a shot at Porting the SR meat onto the nWoD bones and dice mechanics..
Hooo boy, it's nice to throw down with THAT many D10's .. but then getting 20+ hits on a success test and then rolling Nada for drain resist .. was a weird experience
Sticking to D6's and SR3 mechanics to avoid the bloat from now on
Hooo boy, it's nice to throw down with THAT many D10's .. but then getting 20+ hits on a success test and then rolling Nada for drain resist .. was a weird experience
Sticking to D6's and SR3 mechanics to avoid the bloat from now on
But just to make sure, am I going right in the assumption that you would accept a different mechanic (like a d100 mechanic, like in Eclipse Phase), Mach_ten, and that you, Cain, want d6 in general, but would accept either of the incarnations?
QUOTE (Bertramn @ Dec 28 2014, 03:46 PM) 
But just to make sure, am I going right in the assumption that you would accept a different mechanic (like a d100 mechanic, like in Eclipse Phase), Mach_ten, and that you, Cain, want d6 in general, but would accept either of the incarnations?
Sorta.
The important thing is the feel. Shadowrun wouldn't feel right without d6's, but that's not the only requirement. For example, if you converted it to WEG's d6 system, where you total your dice together? That wouldn't feel right either. Or switched it to GURPS, you only roll 3d6 for skill tests there. I'm not opposed to a well-designed fixed TN system, but it has to capture the feel of early Shadowrun.
QUOTE (Bertramn @ Dec 28 2014, 11:46 PM)
But just to make sure, am I going right in the assumption that you would accept a different mechanic (like a d100 mechanic, like in Eclipse Phase), Mach_ten, and that you, Cain, want d6 in general, but would accept either of the incarnations?
D6 is SR to me,
and what the mechanic looks like or how it works I'm not so involved in worrying about other than,
I find SR3 easier to manage dice pools at the table
and SR4 dice pools MUCH easier when playing PbP on here ... with invisible castle etal.
massive 20-30 dice pools with real dice and exploding 6's etc. maaan .. it's fun once ! ... and then ..
We played "Zombier dice" today
if I were to go for a mechanic I'd have purpose build dice ... with three distinct numerations.
1) Physical
2) Mental
3) Combat
Zombie dice have difficulties built into them (red, amber, green dice) with more of one action ... so making a difficult combat shot ? roll "skill #" Red dice
It's somethingf I'm looking into
Give me 3e D6's and variable target numbers any day. So much easier to control bloat while remaining a uniquely Shadowrun resolution mechanic.
guess that explains why i don't hear much about the d8 shadowrun system from one of the supplementals 
I don't really care as long as it seems to deliver expected outcomes. D20 is too simple. I doubt that could work.
3rd ed with moving pools AND target numbers just seems too complex and if you're not careful it destroys balance (see smartlinks/trolls with extra reach).
Honestly I like d6 pools, I just think we need less modifiers. and perhaps smaller pools
3rd ed with moving pools AND target numbers just seems too complex and if you're not careful it destroys balance (see smartlinks/trolls with extra reach).
Honestly I like d6 pools, I just think we need less modifiers. and perhaps smaller pools
It does need to have a probability curve. That means multiple dice. The shifting number of dice is really ideal, because it lets you flatten or squish your curve to properly reflect the skill of the character. d6s are nice because people have them, and normally lots of them. Yes, d10s and d20s give nicer granularity, and at least delay the 6=7 problem, but as a player, especially a new player, I appreciate not having to plunk down another $15 for a huge set of dice I won't use for anything else.
Wow that takes me back, though to be fair it more revolves around 1-7 moreso than a true d8
For those who did not get to see the old Shadowrun Supplementals...
So it keeps close to the d6 theme and corrects for the oddity that a TN of 7 had.
For those who did not get to see the old Shadowrun Supplementals...
QUOTE (Shadowrun D8 by David Buehrer)
Why Eight-Sided Dice?
Don’t get me wrong, using six-sided dice to play Shadowrunworks just fine. However, there’s one little statistical hang-upthat comes into play regarding Shadowrun’s Rule of Six.Because of the Rule of Six, the chances of succeedingwhether the target number is a six or a seven are the same. Theodds of rolling a 6 on a six-sided die is one in six. Using theRule of Six, the odds of rolling a 7 is one in six, because the player must first roll a 6 and then roll a 1. The odds of rolling a1 or better on a six-sided die is 100%.
The Twist
When using eight-sided die for Shadowrun, treat any 8 as a 0. I.E., treat the die as if it is numbered 0-7, substituting 0s for 8s.
By using an eight-sided die that is numbered 0-7 andchanging the Rule of Six to the Rule of Seven, theaforementioned statistical hang-up is eliminated.
If a character needs to roll an 8 to succeed, and one of his dice comes up a 7,his follow up roll might be a 0. Now every negative modifier (increase to the target number) counts.
What’s the Downside?
Aside from spending money to buy more dice, I haven’tfound one. And I’ve thoroughly playtested this with my group.
The odds of success for any given target number generated by using eight-sided dice numbered 0-7 are almost the same as the odds of success generated by using six-sided dice numbered1-6. For some target numbers the odds are a little bit better, for some, a little bit worse.
But generally the play of the game changes very little (except for those players who have been takingadvantage of the quirk of the Rule of Six).Using eight-sided dice numbered 0-7 for initiative createsa little more variance. But since everyone is using the samedice, the quick are still quick, and the slow are still.. well.. slow.
Making Dice Rolls
As with the standard Shadowrun rules, the gamemaster will provide the player with a target number against which he willmake a dice roll. The player rolls the indicated number of diceand then compares each die result individually to the targetnumber. Each individual die that scores equal to or greater thanthe target number is considered a success. The more dice thatscore successes, the better the result.
Target Numbers
The gamemaster determines the target number necessaryfor success in a test normally. See p. 92 of the Skills section for a list of target numbers based on the difficulty of the activity. No target number can be less than 1. If modifiers reducethe target number below 1, consider the target number a 1 for purposes of making tests.
Modifiers
Apply modifiers to the Target Number per the rules.
Rule of Zero
Any time a die roll result comes up a 0 in a test, that die is an automatic failure, no matter what the target number.
But the test can still succeed as long as the other dice succeed.
If all the dice rolled for a test come up 0s, it means that thecharacter has made a disastrous mistake.
Use the Rule of Zero when the rules refer to Shadowrun’s Rule of One.
Rule of Seven
The Rule of Seven allows tests to succeed against targetnumbers greater than 7. When making a test against a targetnumber greater than 7, the player may re-roll any dice that comesup a 7 and then add the new result to the 7. The player can re-roll additional 7s if the current die result total is still less thanthe target number.The Rule of Seven does not apply to initiative tests.
Optional House Rules
Target Numbers
No target number can be greater than 21. If modifiersincrease the target number above 21, consider the task to beimpossible.
Rule of Seven
Do apply the Rule of Seven to one initiative die. If a player is rolling only one die for initiative, than the Rule of Seven isapplied to that die. If a player is rolling multiple dice for initiative, then apply the Rule of Seven to one odd colored die.
Don’t get me wrong, using six-sided dice to play Shadowrunworks just fine. However, there’s one little statistical hang-upthat comes into play regarding Shadowrun’s Rule of Six.Because of the Rule of Six, the chances of succeedingwhether the target number is a six or a seven are the same. Theodds of rolling a 6 on a six-sided die is one in six. Using theRule of Six, the odds of rolling a 7 is one in six, because the player must first roll a 6 and then roll a 1. The odds of rolling a1 or better on a six-sided die is 100%.
The Twist
When using eight-sided die for Shadowrun, treat any 8 as a 0. I.E., treat the die as if it is numbered 0-7, substituting 0s for 8s.
By using an eight-sided die that is numbered 0-7 andchanging the Rule of Six to the Rule of Seven, theaforementioned statistical hang-up is eliminated.
If a character needs to roll an 8 to succeed, and one of his dice comes up a 7,his follow up roll might be a 0. Now every negative modifier (increase to the target number) counts.
What’s the Downside?
Aside from spending money to buy more dice, I haven’tfound one. And I’ve thoroughly playtested this with my group.
The odds of success for any given target number generated by using eight-sided dice numbered 0-7 are almost the same as the odds of success generated by using six-sided dice numbered1-6. For some target numbers the odds are a little bit better, for some, a little bit worse.
But generally the play of the game changes very little (except for those players who have been takingadvantage of the quirk of the Rule of Six).Using eight-sided dice numbered 0-7 for initiative createsa little more variance. But since everyone is using the samedice, the quick are still quick, and the slow are still.. well.. slow.
Making Dice Rolls
As with the standard Shadowrun rules, the gamemaster will provide the player with a target number against which he willmake a dice roll. The player rolls the indicated number of diceand then compares each die result individually to the targetnumber. Each individual die that scores equal to or greater thanthe target number is considered a success. The more dice thatscore successes, the better the result.
Target Numbers
The gamemaster determines the target number necessaryfor success in a test normally. See p. 92 of the Skills section for a list of target numbers based on the difficulty of the activity. No target number can be less than 1. If modifiers reducethe target number below 1, consider the target number a 1 for purposes of making tests.
Modifiers
Apply modifiers to the Target Number per the rules.
Rule of Zero
Any time a die roll result comes up a 0 in a test, that die is an automatic failure, no matter what the target number.
But the test can still succeed as long as the other dice succeed.
If all the dice rolled for a test come up 0s, it means that thecharacter has made a disastrous mistake.
Use the Rule of Zero when the rules refer to Shadowrun’s Rule of One.
Rule of Seven
The Rule of Seven allows tests to succeed against targetnumbers greater than 7. When making a test against a targetnumber greater than 7, the player may re-roll any dice that comesup a 7 and then add the new result to the 7. The player can re-roll additional 7s if the current die result total is still less thanthe target number.The Rule of Seven does not apply to initiative tests.
Optional House Rules
Target Numbers
No target number can be greater than 21. If modifiersincrease the target number above 21, consider the task to beimpossible.
Rule of Seven
Do apply the Rule of Seven to one initiative die. If a player is rolling only one die for initiative, than the Rule of Seven isapplied to that die. If a player is rolling multiple dice for initiative, then apply the Rule of Seven to one odd colored die.
So it keeps close to the d6 theme and corrects for the oddity that a TN of 7 had.
I wasn't sure how to vote, because I think Shadowrun needs to have lots of d6s, and you need to look for successes. I don't want anything that isn't that.
"I do not care about the mechanic, as long as I roll a handful of d6" opens the door for WEG-style adding, which I don't want. So it needed to be one of the other two. I went with "multiple d6 as from 4th Edition onward" because a fixed target number has two serious advantages:
1.) As Smash mentioned, being able to change the target number makes the system more complicated and opens new doors for broken mechanics.
2.) You can buy a bunch of black d6s and color in the 2s, 3s, and 4s with a black Sharpie (and the 1s with a different color). That makes reading large pools about 500% easier.
"I do not care about the mechanic, as long as I roll a handful of d6" opens the door for WEG-style adding, which I don't want. So it needed to be one of the other two. I went with "multiple d6 as from 4th Edition onward" because a fixed target number has two serious advantages:
1.) As Smash mentioned, being able to change the target number makes the system more complicated and opens new doors for broken mechanics.
2.) You can buy a bunch of black d6s and color in the 2s, 3s, and 4s with a black Sharpie (and the 1s with a different color). That makes reading large pools about 500% easier.
QUOTE (Nawara @ Dec 28 2014, 08:34 PM)
1.) As Smash mentioned, being able to change the target number makes the system more complicated and opens new doors for broken mechanics.
Theoretically, yes. In practice, it depends on how solid the rest of the system is.
In SR1-3, while it wasn't hard to change the TN up or down, getting more dice was more difficult. You had your Combat pool and the like, but those were very limited, and spending them early could leave you vulnerable later on. As a result, it worked overall.
Starting with 4.0, even though the TN was fixed, it was trivial to break the system by getting extra dice. When you're rolling 20+ dice against a fixed TN, things just swing too far in the player's favor.
Fixed TN can work, but you need to consider a lot more than just the dice mechanic. You need to consider how everything interacts.
QUOTE
2.) You can buy a bunch of black d6s and color in the 2s, 3s, and 4s with a black Sharpie (and the 1s with a different color). That makes reading large pools about 500% easier.
I took a couple blocks of white dice and use white-out on the non-needed numbers. It helped some, but when you need that many dice, counting them is still a chore.
While I like what SR4 did, I do also like something alongside the d6 system (the one used for Star Wars back then).
What I would by far prefer however, is a system with only a small amount of dice, like 1 d10 or maybe d100. Sure, I know, some people get off on needing bucketloads of dice (including some SR developers), but I just don't; It's just not an elegant system.
If SR is true to the bucket, then I really like the step of having a fixed target of 5 and mali to the pool as measure of difficulty. With a System, like Cyberpunk2020 had it or maybe Eclipse Phase does, difficulty has to be adapted by targetnumber.
As the poll wants me to prefer systems with multiple dice I did not vote.
What I would by far prefer however, is a system with only a small amount of dice, like 1 d10 or maybe d100. Sure, I know, some people get off on needing bucketloads of dice (including some SR developers), but I just don't; It's just not an elegant system.
If SR is true to the bucket, then I really like the step of having a fixed target of 5 and mali to the pool as measure of difficulty. With a System, like Cyberpunk2020 had it or maybe Eclipse Phase does, difficulty has to be adapted by targetnumber.
As the poll wants me to prefer systems with multiple dice I did not vote.
The 'Whatever works' was kinda intended for everything not currently in use, everything included, and the 'handful of d6' was kinda intended for if you would accept either fixed TN or variable TN. Guess I am not very good at this. 
Seriously, I love the shit out of the Eclipse Phase mechanic.
I have never seen d100 so elegant.
Throw d100 under your skill.
A pair is a critical, either success, or failure. -> Your chance to fail critically is higher if your skill is lower.
Margin of Success: If you want to to f.e. kick a grenade away, and kick it into a ventilation shaft at the end of the hall,
you have to archieve a margin of success on your test (20 or 30 under your skill), to get it into the shaft,
If you roll below your skill, but over the margin, you kick it away, but miss the shaft.
Challenge between two parties: Both roll beneath their skill, the higher rolled number wins
Seriously, I love the shit out of the Eclipse Phase mechanic.
I have never seen d100 so elegant.
Throw d100 under your skill.
A pair is a critical, either success, or failure. -> Your chance to fail critically is higher if your skill is lower.
Margin of Success: If you want to to f.e. kick a grenade away, and kick it into a ventilation shaft at the end of the hall,
you have to archieve a margin of success on your test (20 or 30 under your skill), to get it into the shaft,
If you roll below your skill, but over the margin, you kick it away, but miss the shaft.
Challenge between two parties: Both roll beneath their skill, the higher rolled number wins
It is quite elegant and very lovable indeed.
I guess I did not quite get your "catch all others" category, it seemed too much like the other ones, themed for the use of many dice. I'll pick that one now though.
I guess I did not quite get your "catch all others" category, it seemed too much like the other ones, themed for the use of many dice. I'll pick that one now though.
QUOTE (Cain @ Dec 28 2014, 11:53 PM)
Theoretically, yes. In practice, it depends on how solid the rest of the system is.
In SR1-3, while it wasn't hard to change the TN up or down, getting more dice was more difficult. You had your Combat pool and the like, but those were very limited, and spending them early could leave you vulnerable later on. As a result, it worked overall.
Starting with 4.0, even though the TN was fixed, it was trivial to break the system by getting extra dice. When you're rolling 20+ dice against a fixed TN, things just swing too far in the player's favor.
Fixed TN can work, but you need to consider a lot more than just the dice mechanic. You need to consider how everything interacts.
In SR1-3, while it wasn't hard to change the TN up or down, getting more dice was more difficult. You had your Combat pool and the like, but those were very limited, and spending them early could leave you vulnerable later on. As a result, it worked overall.
Starting with 4.0, even though the TN was fixed, it was trivial to break the system by getting extra dice. When you're rolling 20+ dice against a fixed TN, things just swing too far in the player's favor.
Fixed TN can work, but you need to consider a lot more than just the dice mechanic. You need to consider how everything interacts.
That is the benefit of SR3, specifically for combat. It is very easy to run a high-modifier cinematic combat in that system as a GM. Situational modifiers make all the difference to the players' minds, and encourage them to do stuff to make themselves fully involved in the scenes more often when you can give them that little bit of Pavlovian reinforcement with a situational bonus.
I'm going to have to go with the catch-all because while multi-d6 does indeed feel uniquely Shadowrun, I'd really rather try and find a better system.
And honestly, the ones that exist across several games, very few of them strike me as being both quick to handle at the table and also balanced. There are some systems out there, like Dogs in the Vineyard that feel very cinematic, but have issues beyond how it rolls (Dogs has a problem of having no rules or guidelines on buying / owning equipment which is only responsible for 75% of your dice!). Also late-stage combat being fairly dull on account of having gained all the dice you can gain and having to deal with what's left.
And honestly, the ones that exist across several games, very few of them strike me as being both quick to handle at the table and also balanced. There are some systems out there, like Dogs in the Vineyard that feel very cinematic, but have issues beyond how it rolls (Dogs has a problem of having no rules or guidelines on buying / owning equipment which is only responsible for 75% of your dice!). Also late-stage combat being fairly dull on account of having gained all the dice you can gain and having to deal with what's left.
i like the SR3 system better.
QUOTE
'any kind of discussion of randomness ALWAYS WILL EQUATE to being able to critically hit a mech's reactor by firing a micro beam laser while facing 80 degrees to the side, shooting the ground, which would cause a random explosion which would randomly crit his entire team's reactors which would randomly cause the server itself to explode which would randomly generate a strange quark which would randomly hit the earth and randomly randomness randomfuck the shit fuck random!'
I love OpenD6, yet I'm not sure, if I'd like an OpenD6 Shadowrun edition. I think I'd stick with the dice mechanic I've used the last two decades. Perhaps there are better systems, but they'd simply don't feel like Shadowrun. Maybe I'm to old for something totally new. At least concerning Shadowrun.
while i am not fixed on the d6 system, i am fixed on the sr mechanic of skill and attributes directly effecting the dice thrown. i don't like skills and/or attributes just giving modifiers. the systems for savage worlds and serenity are similar, where as your skill improves you throw bigger dice instead of more dice, with some adjustments could work for sr.
*sorry for the all lowercase. i'm typing one handed at work.
*sorry for the all lowercase. i'm typing one handed at work.
QUOTE (Phatpug @ Dec 30 2014, 03:09 PM)
where as your skill improves you throw bigger dice instead of more dice,
Serenity is literally one of the worst dice systems I have ever seen. The more skilled you are, the less dependable your skill is, as the statistical variability climbs as well. It is, literally, the reverse of a good system.
Hypothetically, you could reverse it, where you need to roll below the TN and higher skill gives you a lower die, but you're still dealing with the flat curve, and there's no space for long-shot tests.
How so? If the target number is 4 how is a d12 worse than a d6?
If the TN rises(as i assume) as well, you have more chances to roll below than above.
It makes the easier skill checks trivially easy and does not help as much with the harder stuff.
It makes the easier skill checks trivially easy and does not help as much with the harder stuff.
QUOTE (nezumi @ Dec 30 2014, 12:59 PM)
Serenity is literally one of the worst dice systems I have ever seen. The more skilled you are, the less dependable your skill is, as the statistical variability climbs as well. It is, literally, the reverse of a good system.
Hypothetically, you could reverse it, where you need to roll below the TN and higher skill gives you a lower die, but you're still dealing with the flat curve, and there's no space for long-shot tests.
Hypothetically, you could reverse it, where you need to roll below the TN and higher skill gives you a lower die, but you're still dealing with the flat curve, and there's no space for long-shot tests.
Are you talking about the original Serenity game, or the new one?
The old one was really irritating. I've heard the new one is much better, although I haven't tried it personally. I understand it's basically Cortex Plus, which is a good story system.
As for scaling dice sizes, that can work-- Savage Worlds uses that system to good effect. But it also feels totally different than Shadowrun, so it's not a good choice for conversion.
QUOTE (nezumi @ Dec 30 2014, 03:59 PM)
Serenity is literally one of the worst dice systems I have ever seen. The more skilled you are, the less dependable your skill is, as the statistical variability climbs as well. It is, literally, the reverse of a good system.
Dogs in the Vineyard is one of the "multisize" systems I've seen that I think works "pretty well." Because it's a bidding system. Rolling a 4 on a d4 is just as valuable as rolling a 4 on a d12 (that is to say: not very, but still better than a 1, 2, and 3). The larger die sizes give you access to those higher values, because you can't ever use more than two dice on the defense and one on the attack. But you roll everything first and get to use the results as you please.
The problem came from running out of sources of more dice and being stuck with the low numbers. The cinematic feeling of "I jump through the window (I get my d8 for doing physical stuff) and brandish my Excellent Bible (2d6 because that's the equipment's value) at the demon" goes away.
Rolling multiple d6s (the infamous "bucket of d6s") just feels like Shadowrun to me and I wouldn't want to see it go away. In fact, I was at GenCon last year with two people who had never played Shadowrun before. They played a demo at the CGL booth and that night when we were all drinking at Scotty's Brewhouse, they could not stop talking about how cathartic it felt to be rolling so many d6s. It was a novel and fun concept to them that really became central to how they viewed Shadowrun.
I don't particularly like the d100 roll under mechanic of EP. The way opposed tests work is just weird.
I've been running Dark Heresy using a d100 roll over system, wherein [skill+mods+d100] > 100 = success. This seems odd at first glance but it works because the d100 does not generate a probability curve, just a threshold so the probabliity is the same. For example, if your skill level is 70 your chances of rolling under on a d100 is 70/100. If your skill is 70 and you need a 30+ to sum to 100, there are 70/100 chances of rolling a number 30 or greater. This has three advantages: 1.) the goal is to roll higher numbers (which seems more intuitive especially to new players), 2.) almost all the math becomes addition (which is faster and easier for most people) and 3.) degrees of success are easy to calculate (every 10 points over 100 = 1 degree of success).
But I agree with most, that SR just doesn't feel right without d6 dice pools. I personally prefer the SR4 system.
I've been running Dark Heresy using a d100 roll over system, wherein [skill+mods+d100] > 100 = success. This seems odd at first glance but it works because the d100 does not generate a probability curve, just a threshold so the probabliity is the same. For example, if your skill level is 70 your chances of rolling under on a d100 is 70/100. If your skill is 70 and you need a 30+ to sum to 100, there are 70/100 chances of rolling a number 30 or greater. This has three advantages: 1.) the goal is to roll higher numbers (which seems more intuitive especially to new players), 2.) almost all the math becomes addition (which is faster and easier for most people) and 3.) degrees of success are easy to calculate (every 10 points over 100 = 1 degree of success).
But I agree with most, that SR just doesn't feel right without d6 dice pools. I personally prefer the SR4 system.
QUOTE (Demonseed Elite @ Jan 1 2015, 09:18 AM)
Rolling multiple d6s (the infamous "bucket of d6s") just feels like Shadowrun to me and I wouldn't want to see it go away. In fact, I was at GenCon last year with two people who had never played Shadowrun before. They played a demo at the CGL booth and that night when we were all drinking at Scotty's Brewhouse, they could not stop talking about how cathartic it felt to be rolling so many d6s. It was a novel and fun concept to them that really became central to how they viewed Shadowrun.
I don't know that it needs "buckets", but lots of d6's is part of the fun of Shadowrun. I also think exploding 6's is part of the fun: even when you don't actually need to roll that high, getting that insane result is a lot of fun. I understand, sort of, why they took it out for SR4-- makes the system really swingy-- but it also feels less exciting to me.
For example, I run a kid's game of Savage Worlds. All dice explode in that system, and while there's usually some reward for beating the TN by enough, it doesn't always scale-- often, the rewards cap out. Still, I saw a kid roll a d4 for a success test, and get a 46. Everyone was watching with baited breath as the dice kept exploding, and cheered when he topped out. It didn't matter that there wasn't any really big benefit to the roll, he got a huge roll and won, and that felt great to everyone.
That was part of the fun of early Shadowrun. Exploding dice systems have issues with swinginess, but they're a heck of a lot of fun too.
Fun story (don't remember where I read that so it might not be true): Shadowrun was designed with D10 in mind until someone told the team that using D6 would be better since people already know them and you can find them anywhere and it would set Shadowrun apart from other games. So the team had to update the rules to use D6, leading to the 6/7 problem (the 10/11 problem existed with D10 but was less common).
Personally I don't care. Shadowrun for me is about stories, it's about life in the Shadows, it's not about rolling buckets of D6. For my very short-lived HK campaign, I replaced dice with mahjong tiles, and it was better for the immersion than D6.
Personally I don't care. Shadowrun for me is about stories, it's about life in the Shadows, it's not about rolling buckets of D6. For my very short-lived HK campaign, I replaced dice with mahjong tiles, and it was better for the immersion than D6.
QUOTE (Blade @ Jan 2 2015, 05:08 AM)
For my very short-lived HK campaign, I replaced dice with mahjong tiles, and it was better for the immersion than D6.
How did that work? Sounds intriguing. And I've got a set of tiles.
I think I've already posted something about it...
It's here. But I'm currently working on a new (hopefully better) system, that can also use mahjong tiles (or regular playing cards).
It's here. But I'm currently working on a new (hopefully better) system, that can also use mahjong tiles (or regular playing cards).
I'm firmly in the floating target numbers and exploding dice camp of 3rd Edition and I do link the ubiquitous d6 to Shadowrun instinctively. I do have gripes and of course no system is perfect, for example the mentioned fact that a roll of 6 is the same as 7, 12 is the same as 13 etc; and when a player rolls a crazy 46 for some test and thinks they've done brilliantly just for you to tell them "yeah but that's still just one success"
The whole buckets o' dice of 4th and 5th edition really put me off as does the Attribute + Skill system. Too far weighted towards attributes for my liking.
The whole buckets o' dice of 4th and 5th edition really put me off as does the Attribute + Skill system. Too far weighted towards attributes for my liking.
Idk how to vote, while I like fixed tn with hits I dislike how they used it. I prefer the older style overall (similar to how Cain said when it all fits togeather) but as a general rule is prefer a fixed tn, just not the way it was done
double post
QUOTE (Blade @ Jan 2 2015, 12:08 PM)
Fun story (don't remember where I read that so it might not be true): Shadowrun was designed with D10 in mind until someone told the team that using D6 would be better since people already know them and you can find them anywhere and it would set Shadowrun apart from other games. So the team had to update the rules to use D6, leading to the 6/7 problem (the 10/11 problem existed with D10 but was less common).
Personally I don't care. Shadowrun for me is about stories, it's about life in the Shadows, it's not about rolling buckets of D6. For my very short-lived HK campaign, I replaced dice with mahjong tiles, and it was better for the immersion than D6.
Personally I don't care. Shadowrun for me is about stories, it's about life in the Shadows, it's not about rolling buckets of D6. For my very short-lived HK campaign, I replaced dice with mahjong tiles, and it was better for the immersion than D6.
I think where you heard it got it wrong, both shadowrun and vampire mechanics were designed by Tom dowd. Shadowrun first, the Internet lore goes that vampire was him tweaking the shadowrun system (at least partially true)
Like I said, fixed TN can work, but not in a vacuum.
Classic Shadowrun's dice mechanic looked complex on paper, but in reality it was easy to deal with. Almost all the situational modifiers the GM had to deal with were TN modifiers: you just raised or lowered the TN, which was fairly easy to eyeball. The amount of dice rolled was on the player, they had to figure how many dice they needed-- usually an easy proposition, since base dice was always equal to skill. That meant the GM had fewer things to calculate, and there was less room for miscommunication.
SR4-onward, everything modifies the dice pool. In theory, this is simpler. In practice, the GM has to play the modifier counting game; but now, you can't eyeball it as neatly,because if you get it wrong by even one die, you might shift the outcome in the wrong fashion. Players are also more apt to argue, since it's right there in front of them-- they can see exactly what the modifiers are. On top of that, the player controls a fair number of modifiers on their part, and if they add wrong, they could swing from too easy to screwing themselves, depending on how everything comes together.
Basically, unless you have the player's sheet completely memorized, there's no way of tracking if they're rolling correctly. They might slip up by a die or two, or they might even be adding things together completely wrong. (I had this happen when I started running 4.0-- a player at Missions kept adding his Logic to his computer rolls, and I didn't catch it for a while.) Or, they might be cheating, and not adding in your modifiers properly. Unless you do a dice audit every single roll, you can't keep up.
Classic Shadowrun's dice mechanic looked complex on paper, but in reality it was easy to deal with. Almost all the situational modifiers the GM had to deal with were TN modifiers: you just raised or lowered the TN, which was fairly easy to eyeball. The amount of dice rolled was on the player, they had to figure how many dice they needed-- usually an easy proposition, since base dice was always equal to skill. That meant the GM had fewer things to calculate, and there was less room for miscommunication.
SR4-onward, everything modifies the dice pool. In theory, this is simpler. In practice, the GM has to play the modifier counting game; but now, you can't eyeball it as neatly,because if you get it wrong by even one die, you might shift the outcome in the wrong fashion. Players are also more apt to argue, since it's right there in front of them-- they can see exactly what the modifiers are. On top of that, the player controls a fair number of modifiers on their part, and if they add wrong, they could swing from too easy to screwing themselves, depending on how everything comes together.
Basically, unless you have the player's sheet completely memorized, there's no way of tracking if they're rolling correctly. They might slip up by a die or two, or they might even be adding things together completely wrong. (I had this happen when I started running 4.0-- a player at Missions kept adding his Logic to his computer rolls, and I didn't catch it for a while.) Or, they might be cheating, and not adding in your modifiers properly. Unless you do a dice audit every single roll, you can't keep up.
QUOTE (Cain @ Jan 15 2015, 11:29 AM)
Basically, unless you have the player's sheet completely memorized, there's no way of tracking if they're rolling correctly. They might slip up by a die or two, or they might even be adding things together completely wrong. (I had this happen when I started running 4.0-- a player at Missions kept adding his Logic to his computer rolls, and I didn't catch it for a while.) Or, they might be cheating, and not adding in your modifiers properly. Unless you do a dice audit every single roll, you can't keep up.
Fixed TN can have a similar degree of *coughs* fudging when it comes to dicerolls but I agree it's far easier to spot than with the humungous amounts of dice being dropped with SR4/5. I still have problems with my SR3 group and their dice pools though, so it's not just limited to the higher editions.
Since I run mostly pbp or with newbies, I hadn't appreciated the value of separating the players' side from the GM's. Good thoughts, Cain.
QUOTE (Siygess @ Jan 15 2015, 04:07 AM)
Fixed TN can have a similar degree of *coughs* fudging when it comes to dicerolls but I agree it's far easier to spot than with the humungous amounts of dice being dropped with SR4/5. I still have problems with my SR3 group and their dice pools though, so it's not just limited to the higher editions.
True, but the smaller overall dice pools make it easier to catch major gaffes, as well as fewer sources of dice.
For example, in 3e, I might say: "Why are you rolling 12 dice for that test?"
"Well, I have a skill of 6, and I'm spending 6 combat pool."
Versus:
"Why are you rolling twenty-six dice for that test? You're at a -3 penalty."
"Yes, but I also have the magical furby helping me for six extra dice, and I'm using the modifier on the social chart from p1411 in this book, and the one from the sidebar in that book for another +4, and I've got this piece of gear you've never heard of before for an extra two, and the moon is rising and the sun is in Venus. So, twenty-six!"
QUOTE (Cain @ Jan 16 2015, 01:46 AM)
True, but the smaller overall dice pools make it easier to catch major gaffes, as well as fewer sources of dice.
For example, in 3e, I might say: "Why are you rolling 12 dice for that test?"
"Well, I have a skill of 6, and I'm spending 6 combat pool."
Versus:
"Why are you rolling twenty-six dice for that test? You're at a -3 penalty."
"Yes, but I also have the magical furby helping me for six extra dice, and I'm using the modifier on the social chart from p1411 in this book, and the one from the sidebar in that book for another +4, and I've got this piece of gear you've never heard of before for an extra two, and the moon is rising and the sun is in Venus. So, twenty-six!"
For example, in 3e, I might say: "Why are you rolling 12 dice for that test?"
"Well, I have a skill of 6, and I'm spending 6 combat pool."
Versus:
"Why are you rolling twenty-six dice for that test? You're at a -3 penalty."
"Yes, but I also have the magical furby helping me for six extra dice, and I'm using the modifier on the social chart from p1411 in this book, and the one from the sidebar in that book for another +4, and I've got this piece of gear you've never heard of before for an extra two, and the moon is rising and the sun is in Venus. So, twenty-six!"
Oh I completely agree, your example and the complete setting reboot is the main reason I kept well away from Shadowrun 4 onwards.
QUOTE (Cain @ Jan 15 2015, 06:46 PM)
True, but the smaller overall dice pools make it easier to catch major gaffes, as well as fewer sources of dice.
For example, in 3e, I might say: "Why are you rolling 12 dice for that test?"
"Well, I have a skill of 6, and I'm spending 6 combat pool."
Versus:
"Why are you rolling twenty-six dice for that test? You're at a -3 penalty."
"Yes, but I also have the magical furby helping me for six extra dice, and I'm using the modifier on the social chart from p1411 in this book, and the one from the sidebar in that book for another +4, and I've got this piece of gear you've never heard of before for an extra two, and the moon is rising and the sun is in Venus. So, twenty-six!"
For example, in 3e, I might say: "Why are you rolling 12 dice for that test?"
"Well, I have a skill of 6, and I'm spending 6 combat pool."
Versus:
"Why are you rolling twenty-six dice for that test? You're at a -3 penalty."
"Yes, but I also have the magical furby helping me for six extra dice, and I'm using the modifier on the social chart from p1411 in this book, and the one from the sidebar in that book for another +4, and I've got this piece of gear you've never heard of before for an extra two, and the moon is rising and the sun is in Venus. So, twenty-six!"
Except that it is not as bad as you make it out to be... especially if your players are not actually throwing inordinate amounts of dice. And, Even if they are, it STILL isn't as bad as you make it out to be.
"What's your base Dice Pool?"
"16"
"Subtract 3"
"Okay, Rolling 13 Dice".
See, pretty damned simple, really. Works for any Initial DP. The calculation is trivial. If it does not go that fast, you are doing something wrong.
If, as a GM, you have to have a DP Breakdown/explanation for every roll, you are also probably doing something wrong. AS a GM, you SHOULD ALREADY know what the players high ands low pools are and for what - you approved the character after all. Everything else is gravy.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Jan 16 2015, 07:38 AM)
Except that it is not as bad as you make it out to be... especially if your players are not actually throwing inordinate amounts of dice. And, Even if they are, it STILL isn't as bad as you make it out to be.
"What's your base Dice Pool?"
"16"
"Subtract 3"
"Okay, Rolling 13 Dice".
See, pretty damned simple, really. Works for any Initial DP. The calculation is trivial. If it does not go that fast, you are doing something wrong.
If, as a GM, you have to have a DP Breakdown/explanation for every roll, you are also probably doing something wrong. AS a GM, you SHOULD ALREADY know what the players high ands low pools are and for what - you approved the character after all. Everything else is gravy.
"What's your base Dice Pool?"
"16"
"Subtract 3"
"Okay, Rolling 13 Dice".
See, pretty damned simple, really. Works for any Initial DP. The calculation is trivial. If it does not go that fast, you are doing something wrong.
If, as a GM, you have to have a DP Breakdown/explanation for every roll, you are also probably doing something wrong. AS a GM, you SHOULD ALREADY know what the players high ands low pools are and for what - you approved the character after all. Everything else is gravy.
Well, first problem: define "base dice pool".
SR4.5 doesn't distinguish between dice sources. So, even though your base might be stat + skill, in practice there's a ton of modifiers that will consistently come into play. Like smartlinks-- technically, they're a modifier, and not an addition to the base pool. However, I've almost never seen a person not use it.
Second, if you think anybody can memorize all their dice pools, let alone the major ones, why on earth do they need character sheets? You can just tell them their dice pools every single time, right? I know your gaming group is apocryphical, but that's just silly.
Third, sometimes the player is tracking modifiers you're not aware of, or can't keep track of. Wound modifiers are a big one-- you might remember how many boxes of damage they have, but can you recall exactly how much High Pain Tolerance they took? Or social modifiers, especially since those change quickly. Or, in 5e, Adept Centering: they might be able to offset your penalties, which also doesn't affect the base dice pool.
Fourth, there is no way you can keep track of every applicable modifier at once. In SR4.5, the core book lists 38 possible social modifiers. Not all of them can be applied at once, but here's the question: without looking, can you recite them all from memory?
Obviously not. On top of that, that list only covers purely social modifiers, it doesn't include things like wound penalties, racial abilities, situational bonuses, etc. Which are even more things you have to keep in mind.
Whatever works best I guess. But I do like the shadowrun mechanic for the most part. I like levels of success. And I think the die roll plus modifier style systems or the roll under systems don't usually have a good balance of die roll to the characters ability. If I roll 1d20+9 almost everything is dependent on the d20. With the Shadowrun system that is technically still true but it feels different as each die gives you a shot to get a success.
Now I think shadowrun has issues. It's got a poor attribute to skill balance in 4e on the fixed TN while okay a 5 on a d6 is a really bad choice IMO. It forces a level of dice pool inflation I don't like to feel any level of difference between characters. It's not as bad vs thresholds as they do seem to make each hit a big difference but in opposed tests dude A with a 6 skill who is supposed to be a professional vs a 1 skill total just starter will have the 1 hit difference way too often and that feels like barely any difference as opposed to a massive skill difference that it's supposed to be. Also the variable dice pool is a bit slower than I like. There are just too many modifiers it's like a few rounds into a high level 4e game where you start tracking a dozen modifiers to figure out what to roll.
Now I think shadowrun has issues. It's got a poor attribute to skill balance in 4e on the fixed TN while okay a 5 on a d6 is a really bad choice IMO. It forces a level of dice pool inflation I don't like to feel any level of difference between characters. It's not as bad vs thresholds as they do seem to make each hit a big difference but in opposed tests dude A with a 6 skill who is supposed to be a professional vs a 1 skill total just starter will have the 1 hit difference way too often and that feels like barely any difference as opposed to a massive skill difference that it's supposed to be. Also the variable dice pool is a bit slower than I like. There are just too many modifiers it's like a few rounds into a high level 4e game where you start tracking a dozen modifiers to figure out what to roll.
QUOTE (Cain @ Jan 17 2015, 05:25 AM)
Well, first problem: define "base dice pool".
I get my total DP together before GM modified additions and subtractions. Done.
QUOTE
SR4.5 doesn't distinguish between dice sources. So, even though your base might be stat + skill, in practice there's a ton of modifiers that will consistently come into play. Like smartlinks-- technically, they're a modifier, and not an addition to the base pool. However, I've almost never seen a person not use it.
Doesn't need to... Most of those modifiers can already be accounted for. Have a Smartlink, +2 DP Modifier, accounted for right on the character sheet. Easy Peasy.
QUOTE
Second, if you think anybody can memorize all their dice pools, let alone the major ones, why on earth do they need character sheets? You can just tell them their dice pools every single time, right? I know your gaming group is apocryphical, but that's just silly.
You don't need to... You have a character sheet. My Character sheet, for example, totals all my permanent adds to DP, so I have a Base DP before any situational mods. Again, basic math and notation makes this an easy proposition. Maybe your group has issues with math, I don't know.
QUOTE
Third, sometimes the player is tracking modifiers you're not aware of, or can't keep track of. Wound modifiers are a big one-- you might remember how many boxes of damage they have, but can you recall exactly how much High Pain Tolerance they took? Or social modifiers, especially since those change quickly. Or, in 5e, Adept Centering: they might be able to offset your penalties, which also doesn't affect the base dice pool.
Again, players SHOULD be in control of their DP's prior to GM mods. If they cannot perform basic math functions, maybe Shadowrun isn't for them. Making the GM responsible for everyone is ludicrous. The only data that need be passed on between them at dice roll time is the GM's DP modifiers and the Players roll result.
QUOTE
Fourth, there is no way you can keep track of every applicable modifier at once. In SR4.5, the core book lists 38 possible social modifiers. Not all of them can be applied at once, but here's the question: without looking, can you recite them all from memory?
That is why cheat sheets were invented. I have several sheets on hand to reference these things without having to go to the book. Don't you?
QUOTE
Obviously not. On top of that, that list only covers purely social modifiers, it doesn't include things like wound penalties, racial abilities, situational bonuses, etc. Which are even more things you have to keep in mind.
Which again is why the PLAYER should shoulder some of that burden.
QUOTE (Shinobi Killfist @ Jan 17 2015, 11:48 AM)
Whatever works best I guess. But I do like the shadowrun mechanic for the most part. I like levels of success. And I think the die roll plus modifier style systems or the roll under systems don't usually have a good balance of die roll to the characters ability. If I roll 1d20+9 almost everything is dependent on the d20. With the Shadowrun system that is technically still true but it feels different as each die gives you a shot to get a success.
Now I think shadowrun has issues. It's got a poor attribute to skill balance in 4e on the fixed TN while okay a 5 on a d6 is a really bad choice IMO. It forces a level of dice pool inflation I don't like to feel any level of difference between characters. It's not as bad vs thresholds as they do seem to make each hit a big difference but in opposed tests dude A with a 6 skill who is supposed to be a professional vs a 1 skill total just starter will have the 1 hit difference way too often and that feels like barely any difference as opposed to a massive skill difference that it's supposed to be. Also the variable dice pool is a bit slower than I like. There are just too many modifiers it's like a few rounds into a high level 4e game where you start tracking a dozen modifiers to figure out what to roll.
Now I think shadowrun has issues. It's got a poor attribute to skill balance in 4e on the fixed TN while okay a 5 on a d6 is a really bad choice IMO. It forces a level of dice pool inflation I don't like to feel any level of difference between characters. It's not as bad vs thresholds as they do seem to make each hit a big difference but in opposed tests dude A with a 6 skill who is supposed to be a professional vs a 1 skill total just starter will have the 1 hit difference way too often and that feels like barely any difference as opposed to a massive skill difference that it's supposed to be. Also the variable dice pool is a bit slower than I like. There are just too many modifiers it's like a few rounds into a high level 4e game where you start tracking a dozen modifiers to figure out what to roll.
A single net hit unopposed is a success, so why should the world's best whatever NEED to attain more than a single net hit unopposed? When they are opposed, the superior guy will still get that one net hit more often than not. Now, Inherent ability also plays a part in that. nd maybe the guy with more inherent ability (higher Stat) can still outperform the guy with higher skill but little inherent ability. And maybe some additional skills should not be defaultable with no skill, but that is another discussion entirely.
Maybe a better way to say it is: Why does someone with a Skill 6 need an exceptional success every time they roll the dice?
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Jan 18 2015, 01:42 AM)
A single net hit unopposed is a success, so why should the world's best whatever NEED to attain more than a single net hit unopposed? When they are opposed, the superior guy will still get that one net hit more often than not. Now, Inherent ability also plays a part in that. nd maybe the guy with more inherent ability (higher Stat) can still outperform the guy with higher skill but little inherent ability. And maybe some additional skills should not be defaultable with no skill, but that is another discussion entirely.
Maybe a better way to say it is: Why does someone with a Skill 6 need an exceptional success every time they roll the dice?
Maybe a better way to say it is: Why does someone with a Skill 6 need an exceptional success every time they roll the dice?
There's alot of corner cases where that isn't true, anything that's an extended test for example, mostly dealing with building stuff but that the guys I usually play with tend toward the build a bomb/drug/mod a car crowd so maybe I see it more often than most. I'm not saying the old way is any better for these cases though just that there are many cases where you need more than a single hit
QUOTE
Making the GM responsible for everyone is ludicrous.
Really? But didn't you just say:
QUOTE
If, as a GM, you have to have a DP Breakdown/explanation for every roll, you are also probably doing something wrong. AS a GM, you SHOULD ALREADY know what the players high ands low pools are and for what - you approved the character after all. Everything else is gravy.
So, you should ALREADY KNOW what everyone's major dice pools are... but also, you shouldn't be responsible?
Which is it?
Cain, TJ: move it to PMs.
QUOTE (tete @ Jan 17 2015, 06:58 PM)
There's alot of corner cases where that isn't true, anything that's an extended test for example, mostly dealing with building stuff but that the guys I usually play with tend toward the build a bomb/drug/mod a car crowd so maybe I see it more often than most. I'm not saying the old way is any better for these cases though just that there are many cases where you need more than a single hit
You are right that the corner cases need some attention, but in the grand scheme of things, I do not see an Olympic Level athlete always putting out exceptional successes no matter what he does, and I don't see someone who has the basic skill level to actually succeed failing all that much. The middle ground is where it does get interesting, and I don't think that I want a difference of 4 skill ranks to be all that glaring in that middle ground.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.