Weird resolution systems to resurrect

[SheikhJahbooty]

Kuma has already brought up Alternity.

d20 plus or minus a step die, to roll under an attribute (iirc).

I would also like to bring up d10x, the method of rolling dice from Cyborg Commando.

Roll two ten sided dice, and multiply them, to get a number under a skill rating.

I tried playing Cyborg Commando once and couldn't figure out what the PCs should be doing so then I tried repackaging an adventure that seemed to work when we were playing Living Steel, but then we got confused and stopped playing.

None of that was the fault of that game's method of die rolling.

I'm not saying that I would like to see retro-clones. Retro-clones might be cool, but so would new games that just use these odd methods of producing random numbers.

Would anyone volunteer to use one of these systems? Would anyone like to nominate another weird system for resurrection?

[Rob Lang]

How did the Alternity system work again? Do you roll a d20 and then roll another dice under it or subtract? That seems mad - a randomly rolled target number!

I think any system that requires lots of maths is doomed to failure. Rolling over/under a target is simple. Addition is simpler than subtraction. Multiplication is not so bad if the dice sizes are small (d30 x d30, no way!) and division is out. Most of the systems I tend to read are based on:

(roll + attribute + skill > target number) - linear

or

(roll X dice, count those over target number) - gaussian distribution (bell curve)

Some new systems might be cool but I think they should be simple. A lot of people are returning to Old School games to clone them because they remind them of their youth and also because they were simple and unabashed. They had a nice tight focus and they did that very well. More modern games tend to be more involved, have loads of background and to some get in the way of their fun. It can be a delightful change to have a simpler system with fewer rules and just the tactics of play.

I certainly felt this recently when I play tested Cloudship Atlantis - it was much lighter and simpler than Icar to run and concentrating on the game we were playing was much easier. I wouldn't want to campaign that way for months but it was good for a break.

[Jonathan Ridd]

I don't see critical injury tables making a comeback - which I admit I have a nostalgic soft spot for. As a 14 year old I got excited reading WHFR 1 crit charts and the old Middle earth ones as well "Impaled through the kidneys and die in three agonizing rounds" - great.

People don't like the tables no more

[Rob Lang]

I do like tables but only when you don't have to refer to them all the time. I want most actions to be resolved quickly. If there are rare actions, such as critical hits then a table is fine. I rather like it for that, actually. You see the dice roll critical, you reach for the book, the players go silent. Hush at the table. Another dice is rolled to see the character's fate. There is a lot of joy in that.

Also, if you have rules that support a campaign (like in Dog Town) you need to have tables to support that - there isn't a better way to represent a lot of choice and information. Tables are fine, in their place.

[kumakami]

Rob: the system for alternty was... at base roll a d20, look at your skill, if under that number success (if half then better success, if 1/4 then best success possible). if there are penaltys or bonuses then they trancelate to either a die(s) added (penalty) or subtracted (bonus) to the d20's roll.