The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

What’s wrong with the Wild Die?
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters -> What’s wrong with the Wild Die? Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
So the remove the 1 and the highest other die is a core part of the wild die.. Complications only occur if the roll succeeds even if you total it all up without removing anything. If you add it up normally but it still fails, there's no complication.
That's not a correct reading of the quote. If a 1 occurs the GM can choose one of three options.

Option 1: "Add up the dice normally." If the GM choose this option the 1 on the wild die has no additional effect. The roll will succeed or fail based on a comparison of the total to the target number just like any other roll. There is no complication for this option.

Option 2: "Total up the skill dice normally to see if the skill
roll succeeded, but a "complication" occurs." This is the same as Option 1, except that regardless of whether the roll is successful or not a complication will occur. The roll may succeed. The roll may fail. But there will be a complication.

I see this as Han stepping on a twig and alerting the Biker Scout in RotJ. Did Han succeed in his Sneak roll or did he fail? Who cares. The snapping twig alerted the Scout.*

Option 3: "Subtract the one and also subtract the highest
other die." The roll will succeed or fail based on a comparison of the adjusted total to the target number just like any other roll. There is no complication for this option.



* I realize it might matter whether or not the roll succeeded in some situations. For example, if Han were rolling Sneak to get past successive guard posts if the Sneak roll succeeds Han is able to Sneak past the first three guard posts and only alerts the very last guard. If his Sneak roll fails he alerts the very first guard post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4469
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree. "Total up the skill dice normally to see if the skill roll succeeded, but a "complication" occurs" means the dice roll is added up normally (no subtraction) so still could be success or failure, but either way a complication occurs. It can be dramatically appropriate to have a failure with a complication.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1452

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
I agree. "Total up the skill dice normally to see if the skill roll succeeded, but a "complication" occurs" means the dice roll is added up normally (no subtraction) so still could be success or failure, but either way a complication occurs. It can be dramatically appropriate to have a failure with a complication.


Absolutely. That's how I played it. I just skewed the complications (as noted above) to happen less than every 1-in-6 tosses. That became too often for us--too much unbelievable wonky stuff happening on a regular basis.

This is Star Wars, and we wanted the wonky stuff to happen--we just wanted to to happen less often.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4469
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, with RAW's three options for Wild Die 1s, complications and subtracting die results would each be much less than 1-in-6 of ever die roll.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1452

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If truth be told, I had issues coming up with good complications on the spot. I mean, sure, sometimes something would come to me. And, I'd use the suggestion of the blaster gas empty on the the blaster too many times.

And, I'd have the most trouble giving the character a complication when he succeeded the roll. I do remember one time that I allowed a character's successful blaster attack to hit a grenade bandoleer on his target, blowing up and taking out two of his buddies.

But, I thought that a bit harsh. The players loved it, because it happened to the NPCs, but if I ever reversed that complication to hit a grenade on a PC, I'd hear no end of it. Players don't like massive negatives like that through no real fault of their play, but of only a die roll.

I mean, if you're not in a firefight, it's a bit easier to go against whatever the character is trying to do. If a character is sneaking, then a board creaks or a twig snaps as it did with Han on Endor.

Again, though, what happens if the Sneak roll is successful and gets a complication? That's a harder one to figure, right there on the spot, when you're in the middle of a game with all the NPCs to worry about and your mind focused on keeping the game entertaining.





Another thing I didn't like about Complications: The very act of creating a complication puts the GM in direct conflict with the Player. My players get attached to their characters. We're a roleplay intensive group. My players don't like to lose their character due to a silly dice roll.

If I get too creative with the Complication, and then do something that specific player thinks isn't as bad for another character when a Complication is rolled, then that player feels like I'm picking on him.

I started, at the end of my long-term D6 SW days (before I switched back to 1E), to make interesting lists fr complications. I'd look at the likely choke points where combat would occur, and then I'd write down about 6 ideas for Complications. That way, I could just random roll the Complication when it occurred, and the player wouldn't feel like I'm picking on him.

That got to be a lot of work, though, so I stopped the habit. My SW games had a lot of action in them. I didn't have time, in between games, to keep thinking of neat Complications.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kytross
Captain
Captain


Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Posts: 630

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
If truth be told, I had issues coming up with good complications on the spot. I mean, sure, sometimes something would come to me. And, I'd use the suggestion of the blaster gas empty on the the blaster too many times.

And, I'd have the most trouble giving the character a complication when he succeeded the roll. I do remember one time that I allowed a character's successful blaster attack to hit a grenade bandoleer on his target, blowing up and taking out two of his buddies.

But, I thought that a bit harsh. The players loved it, because it happened to the NPCs, but if I ever reversed that complication to hit a grenade on a PC, I'd hear no end of it. Players don't like massive negatives like that through no real fault of their play, but of only a die roll.

I mean, if you're not in a firefight, it's a bit easier to go against whatever the character is trying to do. If a character is sneaking, then a board creaks or a twig snaps as it did with Han on Endor.

Again, though, what happens if the Sneak roll is successful and gets a complication? That's a harder one to figure, right there on the spot, when you're in the middle of a game with all the NPCs to worry about and your mind focused on keeping the game entertaining.





Another thing I didn't like about Complications: The very act of creating a complication puts the GM in direct conflict with the Player. My players get attached to their characters. We're a roleplay intensive group. My players don't like to lose their character due to a silly dice roll.

If I get too creative with the Complication, and then do something that specific player thinks isn't as bad for another character when a Complication is rolled, then that player feels like I'm picking on him.

I started, at the end of my long-term D6 SW days (before I switched back to 1E), to make interesting lists fr complications. I'd look at the likely choke points where combat would occur, and then I'd write down about 6 ideas for Complications. That way, I could just random roll the Complication when it occurred, and the player wouldn't feel like I'm picking on him.

That got to be a lot of work, though, so I stopped the habit. My SW games had a lot of action in them. I didn't have time, in between games, to keep thinking of neat Complications.


These are some of the same issues that got me to move away from complications and to use the subtract the lowest and the highest each time. If they fail the roll, I tell them they fail, using the regular result table determined by how much they fell short.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cpkeyes
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 06 Jun 2017
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Brain wrote:
Still it's infinitely superior to having multiple goofy symbols to interpret, and forcing the GM to come up with little silver linings and hidden snags almost constently.

I think Star Wars FFG is meant to feel more like a movie than D6.

I actually love it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1452

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cpkeyes wrote:
The Brain wrote:
Still it's infinitely superior to having multiple goofy symbols to interpret, and forcing the GM to come up with little silver linings and hidden snags almost constently.

I think Star Wars FFG is meant to feel more like a movie than D6.

I actually love it.


I'd like to hear why you feel that way. I've never played FFG SW, but I'm turned off by the game system. I don't like the meta-game mechanics.

But, I'm interested in why you like it so much and why you think it is a better fit for Star Wars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 11683
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, ohio.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
If truth be told, I had issues coming up with good complications on the spot. I mean, sure, sometimes something would come to me. And, I'd use the suggestion of the blaster gas empty on the the blaster too many times.


Some of the one's i have used for blaster fights.
They hit the target, but cause something he was holding they needed to fall down a pit/drain/over the side of the roof.
They hit the target with the shot, but at the same time dropped out the power pack of their weapon..
They hit the target, but with the weapon itself, as they threw it at him (if real close, like say within 15m), doing damage as a physical weapon..

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
And, I'd have the most trouble giving the character a complication when he succeeded the roll. I do remember one time that I allowed a character's successful blaster attack to hit a grenade bandoleer on his target, blowing up and taking out two of his buddies.


Sounds like one of my game sessions at Gencon. As the scene got described one of the enemy's sported one of those 4 barrel Flechette/grenade launchers, so i immediately called the shot INTO THE barrel of the launcher, thinking to detonate it in his hands.. FORGETTING THE room was not that large (around 14m by 8m).. SO several of us in the party (myself included) got some of the blowback..

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
But, I thought that a bit harsh. The players loved it, because it happened to the NPCs, but if I ever reversed that complication to hit a grenade on a PC, I'd hear no end of it. Players don't like massive negatives like that through no real fault of their play, but of only a die roll.


I always hate it when players LOVE to do stuff to the enemy, but when the enemy does the EXACT same to them they cry foul, like its breaking some 'unwritten rule'.. Such as a few ADND games ago, the party got into it with some hobgoblins using missile fire from horse back to stay outside of return fire from the hobgob's SHORTER range weaponry..
Then 2 game sessions later, a band of human bandits who were based somewhat on Mongols used the same tactic On them.. THEY all bar 1 player, cried i was being cruel to them...

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Again, though, what happens if the Sneak roll is successful and gets a complication? That's a harder one to figure, right there on the spot, when you're in the middle of a game with all the NPCs to worry about and your mind focused on keeping the game entertaining.


Perhaps make them 'sweat'. Say by having one of the nearby imperials, come to LOOK saying over his comms "I thought i saw something." Take a look AT RIGHT WHERE the pc's are, shake his head, start walking back off and report back in "Nope. Must have just been local wild life. Hey if i catch that damnable rabbit, you gonna skin it TK993?"..

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Another thing I didn't like about Complications: The very act of creating a complication puts the GM in direct conflict with the Player. My players get attached to their characters. We're a roleplay intensive group. My players don't like to lose their character due to a silly dice roll.


So far i have only had ONE complication to my recollection, cause any actual injury to a PC.. Was running over stony terrain, going AFTER an imperial spy they were trying to capture, he got a complication on his running roll (totally bommed it to be more exact), and face planted into one of the rocks, giving him a stun but described it as he broke his nose.. THAT was it.. The player got MORE peeved he fell, than broke his nose..
_________________
It's Not who you kill, but how they die!
You cannot dodge it if you do not know it is coming, and you cannot hit it if you do not know its there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
If truth be told, I had issues coming up with good complications on the spot.
If I can't think of a good complication I'll use Option 1 or 2 instead. A complication is supposed to add to the game by occasionally making things harder in an interesting way, ramping up the tension, or adding some humor to the situation. If I can't think of anything that does one of those things then I don't add a complication.

garhkal wrote:
Perhaps make them 'sweat'. Say by having one of the nearby imperials, come to LOOK saying over his comms "I thought i saw something." Take a look AT RIGHT WHERE the pc's are, shake his head, start walking back off and report back in "Nope. Must have just been local wild life. Hey if i catch that damnable rabbit, you gonna skin it TK993?"..
I like that. Its not a complication per se, but it momentarily adds tension and it reminds the players that one mistake and they could be spotted and the Imperials could call in reinforcements.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1452

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
If truth be told, I had issues coming up with good complications on the spot.
If I can't think of a good complication I'll use Option 1 or 2 instead. A complication is supposed to add to the game by occasionally making things harder in an interesting way, ramping up the tension, or adding some humor to the situation. If I can't think of anything that does one of those things then I don't add a complication.


My players wouldn't think that fair. They're not easy going when it comes to their characters. We are heavy roleplayers, and the players most often get extremely invested in their characters.

So, if Jack rolls a 1, and I can't think of anything, and I say, "Remove the 1 and the highest." Then, Peter rolls a 1, and I still can't think of anything, and I say, "Remove the 1 and the highest."

Freddy won't like it when, as he rolls a 1, I say, "You feel your handle on your blaster getting warm! The powerpack is malfunctioning and may explode!" taking away the character's only weapon. Freddy will say, "Why does that have to happen to me? The only thing that happened to Peter and Jack is that they rolled lower--and Jack still hit!"




The other thing about Complications...

They should be tied to the skill where the complication is rolled. If you roll a Complication on your Sneak roll, then accidentally stepping on a downed branch and making a snapping noise is valid. It goes with the Sneak roll.

It wouldn't make sense if the Complication, because of the Sneak roll, was that the character's macrobinoculars run out of battery power.

And, it doesn't make sense if the Complication is attached to another character, as with a complication being rolled for a Blaster Attack and the Complication turns out to be that some stormtroopers automatically find a way to sneak around the character to flank him and get him in a cross-fire.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cpkeyes
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 06 Jun 2017
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Cpkeyes wrote:
The Brain wrote:
Still it's infinitely superior to having multiple goofy symbols to interpret, and forcing the GM to come up with little silver linings and hidden snags almost constently.

I think Star Wars FFG is meant to feel more like a movie than D6.

I actually love it.


I'd like to hear why you feel that way. I've never played FFG SW, but I'm turned off by the game system. I don't like the meta-game mechanics.

But, I'm interested in why you like it so much and why you think it is a better fit for Star Wars.

I don't think it's a better fit, I honestly prefer D6 for it's customization. I just find FFG fun to play and don't mind it's system.

Star Wars FFG feels more like I am playing a movie, it tends to be more cinematic and it's pretty easy to get into. At least for me. I never did mind the whole figuring out how to figure out a silver lining, because I either ignored it, and I like improvising anyway.

I find FFG is better for a quick, not so serious game. FFG is easier than D6. D6 is more 'serious' to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wajeb Deb Kaadeb
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Apr 2017
Posts: 1452

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cpkeyes wrote:
At least for me. I never did mind the whole figuring out how to figure out a silver lining, because I either ignored it, and I like improvising anyway.


I'm not sure I follow you here. What silver lining are you referring?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3606
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
My players wouldn't think that fair.
Well then I guess maybe you shouldn't do that.

Although that’s not a player attitude I’ve seen a lot in Star Wars. But different groups are different.

Quote:
The other thing about Complications...

They should be tied to the skill where the complication is rolled. If you roll a Complication on your Sneak roll, then accidentally stepping on a downed branch and making a snapping noise is valid. It goes with the Sneak roll.

It wouldn't make sense if the Complication, because of the Sneak roll, was that the character's macrobinoculars run out of battery power.

And, it doesn't make sense if the Complication is attached to another character, as with a complication being rolled for a Blaster Attack and the Complication turns out to be that some stormtroopers automatically find a way to sneak around the character to flank him and get him in a cross-fire.

I understand and sympathize with the desire to have effects in a game world proceed in a logical, real world way from causes. I see that as a game world ontological problem or issue. How much concern I have about ontological issues varies with the type of game I am playing.

In Star Wars, for the macrobinoculars running out of power due to a Sneak mishap, I’d find it more elegant to explain it as follows:

I wrote:
“You successfully crawled past the Imperial guard post, but when you go to use your macrobinoculars to scan the prison complex you find that they are out of charge. Apparently the Power On button must have been bumped when you moved through the dense woods an hour ago.”


In a more simulationist set of rules like Runequest or Call of Cthulhu I’d be more concerned with game world effects strictly following logically from causes. In Star Wars, I’m mostly seeking a movie-like genre emulation so I am less concerned with effects strictly following from appropriate causes. That said, your stormtrooper ambush due to a failed Blaster Attack is a bridge too far for me. UNLESS, I can more clearly tie it in to the actual skill used.

I wrote:
“Your shot wildly missed and hit a com panel.” And in fact hitting the com panel caused a short circuit that turned the com panel on so that Security could hear the sounds of a blaster fight down in corridor 12. In response the officer of the day sent stormtrooper reaction squads to surround and close in on corridor 12.


Now I might, or might not let the players know what the ultimate effect was from hitting the com panel.

I don’t think I should always have to make such things clear to my players. I expect that players should trust the GM enough not to unduly worry that the GM is trying to mess with their character via a mishap or complication. In the same way I expect that players don’t have to visibly see every die roll I make just so they don’t think I am cheating against their favorite PC.

And in turn, I expect that the GM should not abuse the players’ trust.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cpkeyes
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 06 Jun 2017
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wajeb Deb Kaadeb wrote:
Cpkeyes wrote:
At least for me. I never did mind the whole figuring out how to figure out a silver lining, because I either ignored it, and I like improvising anyway.


I'm not sure I follow you here. What silver lining are you referring?

If you fail a roll but get an advantage or triumph on the roll on like....dancing. You failed wooing the people that you wanted, but someone important saw you and was impressed.

For example.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0