Why aren't d6 pools with success counting (e.g. MYZ) more popular? It's so easy. Pick up a number of d6s equal to an attribute, plus a skill, plus a situational modifier, plus gear. Some situational setback? remove some of them.It creates these elegant logistic curves that closely mirror how actual skill acquisition occurs in measured skills.
>>98046904Have you by chance played games?
>>98046904man i can't wait to add 10+ integers in my head for every single move on my day off
>>98046981It’s literally inspired by MYZ you mongoloid>>98047023Success counting. Retard. Just roll and find 6sHas the IQ of this board dropped or something?
>>98047023He's making it sound more complicated than it is. You're just rolling xd6 and counting 5-6 as successes. For example, you roll 10d6. You get 1,1,2,3,3,4,5,5,5,6. You ignore anything 4 or lower, so you have 4 successes.This is best used in contested combat pools by the way.
>>98046904>Why aren't d6 pools with success counting (e.g. MYZ) more popular?Gygaz.
>>98047174ah I see. so he's intentionally being annoying by withholding information and acting like everyone else's crazy for not getting it. a public mental fapping session. rather shameful behavior.
>>98046904Shadowrun did big d6 dice pools. Grabbing a fistful of dice was fun, but I'm not eager to re-visit the rest of that system.3rd ed SR also had target number adjustment variable number of hits needed, and it was not necessarily trivial to quickly asses if loss of dice, higher tn, or increased number hits"needed to succeed were the worse modifier in any circumstance.Classic WoD did success counting from a pool of d10s if I recall correctly. That gives a bit more play with tn modifiers.
>>98046904Because everything that's not D&D or "I can't believe it's not D&D!" isn't popular and they use 1d20.This doesn't mean dice pools are better or worse than other systems, but they won't get popular until D&D gets dethroned.
>>98047174>You're just rolling xd6 and counting 5-6 as successesNope. Not 5 and 6, just 5 or just 6 or just 1, etc.Graph says 0.3 chance of 1 or more successes on 2d6. About 0.025 chance to roll 2 successes on 2d6. Those match the chances you'd expect when you have a 1/6 chance of a success on any single die.If there were two faces that were successes, e.g. 5 and 6, the chance of at least one success on 2d6 would be 0.556 which is far below what the graph shows on the blue curve.
>>98047267Considering that success-counting dice pools are reasonably common, being used most prominently in Shadowrun with d6s and in Storyteller system and its derivatives with d10s, maybe OP just expected fa/tg/uys to be familiar with the basic concept?
>>98046904four steps? your system blows
>>98046904Because d100 is wildly superior and allows for smoother gameplay by simply having the players apply their own modifiers and roll against their own stats, and then the GM eyeballs a difficulty based on environment, task, and situation, and boom, out comes a result that comes with an easily determined number of degrees of success or failure (usually counted as +10/-10 beyond target number).It's that simple.
>>98046904I don't know. They're so fucking mathematically beautiful.
>>98047752the d100 has all the problems of the d20, I'm not sure why anyone likes it other than speed of use.
>>98046904next time set x axis ticks by step of 2, step by 2.5 for integer value make no sense, you'll never roll "half a die"plt.xticks(range(2, 20, 2))should do the trick
>>98047786That's the thing, we're talking game systems here and not a presentation on aesthetically pleasing statistics. In actual play mathematical beauty is most of the time utterly irrelevant. And to be perfectly honest a lot of it is utterly misunderstood as well, like people going on about the dice being on a bell curve for rolls that are pass-or-fail.
>>98046904Something that's adjacent to dice pools that I think is cool as hell is SotDL's boons and banes.Add dice, remove dice, roll the handful of dice, take the higher. Easy.
>>98046904If anything, they're too popular.The low barrier to entry attracts too many people to the hobby who want to make every game as generic and unengaging as their collaborative writing slop.The mere suggestion of having any sort of math in a game or an actual rule structure makes them screech and cry about board games and video games, and they insist there's only one way to roleplay.There should be a variety of games, not just the overpriced books of suggestions for narrative shit these retards want to push.
>>98047267>my ignorance of basic math means everyone else who knows more than me is my enemyActing contentiously like this befits a child. Reflect on this and better yourself
>>98046904I was actually going through life generally in favor of d6 pools UNTIL you showed me this graph. You've successfully converted me away from this idea.>needing to roll NINE DICE just to have an 80% chance of success on the easiest category of relatively mundane task.I don't want to chase and sort a thousand pieces of plastic just to figure out how tasty my character's homemade pancakes are. Heaven forbid I want to succeed on any marginally difficult task more than 50 percent of the time: I'll need a damn bucket for all the dice.>just count success on a 5 or 6So now sorting them is harder because I can't just pick one thing and ignore everything else. At this point, I'm better off using custom dice. Either way, this idea was created by Big Dice (R) to sell more Dice (TM).
>>98047716You mean 4 levels of difficulty, or 4 discrete mechanical steps? Because there's one.>>98047752I do like BRP. The advantage of dice pools is easy addition of dice. Success counting is simply faster. Gets the mechanics out of the way of play.>>98047940Valid.>>98048067It tracks from the table as well. You just need to be cognizant of how large the pools should be. In general, I think "untrained below average" should be 2d6 (attribute only), "untrained below average with good gear" should be around 4d6 (attribute+some gear bonus), "trained, below average person, with gear" around 6d6 (attribute+skill+gear), etc. Well trained people with great gear and natural acumen should probably be rolling ~12-16 dice.
>>98047267Bro, it's dice pool plus success counting similar to MYZ. I'm not sure how dumb I can make this for you. Maybe go back to 5e general.
>>98048266FitD does something like this. Roll a bunch, take the highest outcome. Bigger pools, obviously, increase the likelihood of rolling high.>>98048442It's not a math issue. 3d6 accomplishes similar curves. However, speed of resolution is a merit in and of itself, no?>>98049163That's why if it's a mundane task, I wouldn't have someone roll. Dice pools get big fast. Let's say a system has an average attribute score of 1-5, skill score 1-5, and gear score 1-5. You are easily rolling 9d6 for a "journeyman" equivalent. If that doesn't feel good, just bump the ceiling. Compare to any BRP, and most of the time your "skilled" range is 55-75%.
>>98047267He's being a smarmy little shitstain, yes. As shown below, he can't even read the fucking graph he's jerking himself off to, so he's a retard pretending to be intelligent as well.The basic gist of a d6 pool though is that it allows for a fairly predictable return on investment. With the example I used every 3 or so dice you have in a pool will on average be one success. So outside of extremely bad luck (or good luck!) a pool of 9d6 will result in 3 successes most of the time. This is, of course, what the chart shows; the more dice in your pool, the greater your odds of success. Now the chart itself shows with only a range of 6 as a success; with a 5-6, it's going to look a little different, but more in that the Y-axis will get higher and thus the curves will look slightly different.>>98047628The chart literally says 2d6-20d6 you mongoloid. It's talking about dice pools. And sure, it counts only 6s, but that's extremely unusual in actual d6 pool systems (i.e. Shadowrun). in fact, in any dicepool system, there's usually a range of success and failure, which can vary depending on the system. For example, Exalted uses d10s and counts 10s as 2 successes, and if you roll enough 1s you'll Fumble instead, with everything else being success or failure. Limiting yourself to 2 dice and a success range of 6 is basically being given a power drill and using the blunt end of the grip to hammer the screws into the wood.
>>98049734>Based on MYZ>"I thought it meant 5 and 6's"I'm sure you find most people condescending whenever you talk to them. Please leave.
>>98049734>The chart literally says 2d6-20d6Your point? Nothing I wrote contradicts that.It doesn't matter that it's "extremely unusual" to count only one face on a die as a success or that some games count a maximum face as 2 successes when the fact is that chart only counts one face as a success not two as claimed. You need to chill dude. I wasn't saying you were stupid I was saying you were wrong.
