Tabletop RPG resolutions
One of my side-projects that I sadly get to spend less time on than I’d like, is a tabletop RPG system. It was originally intended for a dark urban fantasy setting (and another side-project that hasn’t seen any love for quite a while), but has grown past that. Anyway, I can get back to the worldbuilding elements and how it ties into mechanics another time because right now, I’m trying to decide on tone and the core resolution mechanic.
The resolution mechanic of a TTRPG is, simply put, how you determine if a character succeeds at something they’re attempting to do or not. The most famous game of them all, Dungeons & Dragons fifth edition, uses a twenty-sided die (a “d20”) and adds the result to a bonus from one of its six main attributes and an extra bonus if the character is trained in the specific activity. The sum is compared to a value defined by how hard the task is and an equal or higher result means a success. As another example, the Generic Universal Role-Playing System (GURPS for short) has a value based on some basic attribute that determine how good a character is at that sort of thing and that value is modified up or down depending on how hard the task is, how well trained the character is, and more. The player then rolls three six-sided dice and sum them up (“3d6”) — if the result is equal or lower than value they had calculated before, they succeed.
For my system, I’m currently considering three different options.
Die + Core + Skill
This is the same logic as D&D, though I intend to have several levels of how well trained a character is. I could make use of several dice here in order to create a bell curve of probability and thus get the more natural flow of a normal distribution, but that wouldn’t serve the play I want. Things going unexpectedly well is almost as fun as when they go terribly wrong. In both cases, it can lead to interesting situations for players to adapt to and a linear distribution leaves a better chance of extreme values.
The number of sides on the die reflects how much is left to chance compared to the static values added to it. In this case I might go with a d20 both because of tradition and because it allows me to have many steps on my ladders for the static values without removing chance too much. The result would be compared to a a value for difficulty to determine success, and level of success.
The advantage of this system is that many players with previous experience are likely to be familiar with this sort of resolution. It is also easy for players to get an overview as every roll will be handled the same way.
Die + Skill, adding Core Tokens
Cypher uses a very similar mechanic to this. The player has a number that represents their training in the specific activity and will add that to the result of a die roll (again likely a d20), but they have a chance to decide to increase their odds. Very general core attributes have a number of tokens that represent their potential with various efforts. They may spend such tokens before they roll, adding a certain amount per token to the total. After the result of the roll has been added, the whole sum is compared to a difficulty value to determine the outcome.
This sort of system enables dramatic moments when the story calls for them. A very strong character can more reliably do things that require a lot of muscle and still provide a great deal when it comes to important story beats. But, while a weak character will likely not even try using strength to handle most things, they can still muster some effort when it really matters as they will have their few tokens left. On the other hand, it will take some getting used to for players to know how and when to spend their tokens and how difficult tasks are also becomes a matter of how often rolls are called for.
Dice Tokens + Skill
This idea builds on the previous one but keeps the span of results tighter while still emphasising chance. Instead of tokens from the core attributes adding to the result, they are dice. By default, a roll would be rolling a die and adding a number for specific training. The player may choose, before rolling, to spend one or more of their dice associated with the most relevant attribute. The highest number rolled on any of the dice is added to the static value for the end result.
This has many of the advantages of both previous methods. Plus, rolling a lot of dice is objectively fun — especially when you don’t have to add them up. Unlike with the static tokens in idea 2, raw talent can’t make you better at a task, but it can make you more reliably at the top of your game. The potential downside here is that the core attributes might matter less. This doesn’t have to be a bad thing, but it does mean that players need to plan more carefully for what they want to be really good at.
This third option is what I’m currently leaning towards. It will highlight dramatic storytelling and it allows players to choose when they want to be cool instead of leaving it completely to chance. What it lacks is a way to ensure those exciting times when things just happen to go wrong. And playtesting. It lacks a lot of playtesting.