Talk:Simple D6
Contents
Risus[edit]
Has the author of this seen Risus yet? The system is strikingly similar. Can't be avoided when you're making a system this simple. Simple D6 could learn from Risus's "clichés", and Risus could learn from Simple D6's "Yes, and..." --NotBrandX 15:37, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Nope havent read Risus yet but I will definately look into it when I get the chance. It looks very interesting. Simple d6 was made on a whim when I was making a simple nazi-zombie-and-world-war-2-veterans-also-there-is-a-butler scenario and I just couldnt be arsed to find a fitting system. After running it through /tg/ the critical system (and...) was added and a few things were narrowed down and that was really it.
- On an entirely unlerated point, would anyone be interested in sample characters? I have 7-8 lying around I needed for different games -- Shadowplay
Edit: Just checked up on Risus and I dont see much similarity except that both systems use d6.
Risus uses dice pools and if you dont have enough dice, you will forever be unable to perform certain tasks because thats just how the world works. Simple d6 only ever lets you benefit from a single die even if you roll more than that. This means that simple d6 removes the need for game-slowing math and makes character progression into a reversed exponential curve which in turn helps even out the difference between "high level" characters and new characters.
Lastly, Risus also has a definate focus (in concepts) which Simple d6 does not have since Simple d6 is a do-it-all-kind of system. -- Shadowplay
- The systems are similar because they are both attempts at minimizing rulesets for role-playing, and use freeform skill lists as the character sheet. Before you pooh-pooh Risus for being too specific, please note SimpleD6 has a definite focus on physical combat (hitpoints, damage resist) which Risus does not. I don't see how I could adjudicate a social conflict in SimpleD6 other than a simple pass/fail. If this is acceptable, why must physical conflict be a special case instead of another pass/fail? I'm with you for the use of "target numbers" in Risus: that feels like GM fiat. The "Yes, and..." offered in SimpleD6 is superior. --NotBrandX 13:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
The intention was not to belittle Risus but merely to point out the differences. But you are right - there is no way in the rules to adjucate social conflicts in Sd6 and that is because I firmly believe that the core of roleplaying is excatly the social conflicts. Rather than encouraging people to roll dice and thus cheat themselves for actual roleplaying experiences, I chose to completely ignore them and urge people to play them out. I suppose you could add a social stamina and social stamina damage reduction (Insistance?) as well if you want. My view of roleplaying is that it is the actions that you as a character makes which makes for good roleplaying and since social interaction is a pletora of choices and decision making, it would be a shame to encourage people to miss out on them in favor of rolling a die. Not to say that rolling for social encounters is intrinsicly a bad thing - it is just not what I enjoy in a game so it is probably just as much a selfish ideological decision on my part.
As for the minimalistic approach, yeah you are right - but when I read the systems individually, Risus comes across as alot more slapstick oriented with a dash of hollywoodistic cliches and a pinch of steriotypical resonance. That is not a bad thing at all but it does make it a little hard to make serious detective games or deep characters if the people playing have the idea that their characters are based on cliches and cardboard characters. I could be mistaken and it could just be my understanding of simple semantics but that is the feeling I get when reading Risus and seeing their homepage which is filled with stickmen in all kinds of environments. Sd6 is in its presentation much more straight-to-the-point and keeps reminding the players to double check with the GM to make sure that their character will fit in the setting. Some could probably call it a little more no-fun-allowed.tiff oriented but that comes down to personal preferences. -- Shadowplay
Suggestions[edit]
- SimpleD6 has damage resist & hitpoints for physical conflicts -- what about other types of conflicts? Social, intellectual, professional, mystical?
- As it looks like now I will probably not add rules for other kinds of conflicts. See the Risus discussion for details. -- Shadowplay
- Need better definition for what is and isn't a "skill," to avoid players choosing skills that are so broad as to be overpowered, or so specific as to be useless.
- True, I will look into this by giving a few more examples of good and bad skills and probably a few sample characters for different settings. -- Shadowplay
Sample Characters[edit]
I made a few pages with sample characters. Would they be relevant to upload so people can get their imagination running? -- Shadowplay
- Make them sub-pages (ie.: [[Simple_D6/Travis_Dumont|Travis_Dumont]]) and link them in the main article. --NotBrandX 01:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Probabilities[edit]
I can't sleep; gonna crunch numbers. --NotBrandX 03:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
| Result | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | "hit" | "crit" |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Damage | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | >= 2 | "and..." |
| 1 die | 16.7 | 16.7 | 16.7 | 16.7 | 16.7 | 16.7 | - | - | 50% | 17% |
| 2 dice | 2.8 | 8.3 | 13.9 | 19.4 | 25.0 | 27.8 | 2.8 | - | 75% | 31% |
| 3 dice | 0.5 | 3.2 | 8.8 | 17.1 | 28.2 | 34.7 | 6.9 | 0.5 | 88% | 42% |
(Table fixed by Shadowplay to reflect the original intent with damage)
Very nice - but shouldn't it be 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 .... damage and not 0 0 1 2 2 3 4 5...? --Shadowplay
- The rules state "You deal 1 damage for each degree of success on the attack roll". The attached chart has these degrees of success: 'No, and', 'No', 'Yes, but', 'Yes', 'Yes, and', 'Yes and and', 'Yes and and and', &c. Die facings 3 and 4 share the same 'Yes' (no 'and' nor 'but') degree of success. I assumed that results with 'No' would do 0 damage. 'Yes, but' doing 1 point of damage, when everyone has 1 point of damage resistance, feels right; e.g.: "Yes you hit, but you did negligible damage." --NotBrandX 02:42, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Then its my bad for not explaining it properly. What I meant was that you deal 1 damage for each point the dice exceeds what you need for a success (like 10's in Dark Heresy for instance) and since it is used alot in some of the games I play, I just called it that. I should probably change it to "1 damage for each point the result exceeds 2" or something like that. --Shadowplay
Sample characters, a setting and a sample one-off game[edit]
I have written most of 8 sample characters for different settings (low fantasy, 40k psyker, modern terrorist, sci-fi government runaway and 4 gentlemen from 2nd world war for the one-off. Im going to post it all here in the very near future but I am still translating it into english. Just a heads up I guess. --Shadowplay
I got a few characters here - I still have 4 more in the making but they are all linked to an adventure which I am still trying to find time to translate into English. They will come up eventually. For now, these characters still look like ass and havent been included in the main page yet.
