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

Geting rid of spending Character Points on rolls
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Geting rid of spending Character Points on rolls Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Quetzacotl
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Posts: 281
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

atgxtg wrote:
Indeed they could have. What's your point?


The point is, that they shouldn't be surprised about that ^^

atgxtg wrote:
You see, the thing with the D&D mindset is that while they could have done these or a host of other sensible things during the coruse of campaign, didn't believe they should have needed to as they were experienced gamers and therefore knew how the rule SHOULD work. If the rules didn't work that way then something was obviously wrong with them.

Have to admitt, I can't really imagine that those kind of people really exist, not that I don't believe you, but I have never met those.
I encountered a lot of players using the rules to their advantage and thus screwing around with the game balance, but simply "ignoring" the rules of the game and simply saying that it can't be like that although they have access to the rules... never encountered any like that.


atgxtg wrote:
You sound like a bunch of level headed clear thinking gamers. How much D&D do you play?

More or less none. We once hat a run with some lvl 1 chars that got to lvl 5 in a custom campaign with a group, when we wanted to try the 4th Edition and later I DMed around with only 3 people, but thats essentially it.

I'm playing TBE now for nearly 1 1/2 years playing in a group where some of them have played that system for around 4-5 years.

But playing D6, they either read the rules, and we dicussed the rules beforehand (if we thought something was unbalanced/strange or the like) but thats it. We never got into the "this worked in TBE, it will work here as well"-mindset at all.

atgxtg wrote:
Dumb? Yes. Plain dumb? Not quite. Some of them were so dumb as to completely surprise me. Others were just heavily conditioned, and could snap out of it. And it is a form of conditioning. Basically, you learn what the "laws of the universe" are like through first hand experience. So after years and years some things become fine tuned to an almost automatic response. Players do them without really thinking because they KNOW from past experience that they work.


Again, never had something like that.

The reason why they went directly to the bridge in my game was because the "leader" of the group was the Person who, in real life, has absolutely no sense for tactics whatsoever. all he wanted to do, was doeing the same thing that the Jedi do in the Films and the Series. There we often see it that the 2 to 3 Jedi just go to the Bridge and fight through any amount of Droids there.
I told him that this only works because Obi-Wan and the like have like 8D - 10D in all the necessary skills, but at that time, it was already to late -.-

atgxtg wrote:
When the PCs escaped the player was puzzled, confused and angry, as he expected that if Ventress was in the adventure, then she must naturally have been balanced to the party and thus the group should have been able to take her.


That reminds me of Spoony (don't know if any of you know him). He said that "if you stat it, the players will try to kill it".
In our group, we usually go the other way. When the GM tells us who we're up against, at least one player will know that person or creature. And if it's a creature with high stats, they tend to start whining that they won't survive that encounter -.- (in my opinion, thats even worse then just assuming you can kill it.... but that might be just me).


I always said to our GM (I only GMed our first SW D6 game and the last D&D game): If we behave stupidly and we get a chance to realize that we act stupid, then it SHOULD affect and even kill us.
I should mention that I currently hold the record in player deaths in our current TBE "campaign" (it's not really a campaing but we go on and on ^^). But hey, the game would loose a lot of its value if I knew with certainty that, no matter what I do, I will survive... Sometimes retreat is the only way (especially if we angered the wrong person ^ ^).

But I fear I digress to much here ^ ^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quetzacotl wrote:
Didn't the players have access to the Rules of the game you were running?
I mean they could simply read that you're right and they should have known that before hand...


Some times it does not matter if they have the rules shown to them in black and white (such as the above instance for energy drain i posted), they feel that the later games (or that specific game) was better, and any other game or system that didn't have similar rules sucks.


Quetzacotl wrote:

So yeah, when it comes to fighting, players tend to forget that their characters are not gods and can (easily) die -.-


And if they do die, they blame the system and/or the DM for not tiering the challenge to their level/capabilities like others do, OR for not giving out enough warning that the challenge was a tough one.

Quote:
When the PCs escaped the player was puzzled, confused and angry, as he expected that if Ventress was in the adventure, then she must naturally have been balanced to the party and thus the group should have been able to take her.


Well said.. Sometimes it does not matter whether they were raised with ADND, or pathfinder, or runequest, though.. they just get into the mantra (possibly from pc games) that if something is put in front of them, it MUST mean you want then to fight it and that it can be defeated.
They don't think that there must be some things out there that are NOT supposed to be fought cause they can/will wipe the floor with you.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quetzacotl
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Posts: 281
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to avoid the confusion:
The game i'm always talking about is actually "TDE - The Dark Eye". I translated it on my own, thats why I always though its "The Black Eye". But, as it turns out, the official translation is a little different ^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon The Lion
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 309
Location: Somewhere in Poland

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

'Key, we've drifted way off topic here. Not that I mind, really. It's completely natural for conversations.

Anyway, the main subject is complete I guess. I got some opinions and advice - some of which I even agreed with and will use Razz - and decided on a beta shape for the house rule.

We can by all means use the rest of the thread to continue to b**** about D&D. Wink
_________________
Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quetzacotl
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Posts: 281
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Care to elaborate what exactly you're gonna use now? (or whenever you got the details right ^^)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon The Lion
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 309
Location: Somewhere in Poland

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Once more with feeling:

Character Points can no longer be spent for additional dice to augment rolls. Instead, characters now have the Luck "skill", which works thus:

1. Each die in the Luck skill gives a character one Luck Point;
2. Luck Points can be spent on boosting rolls exactly like CPs are now (and maybe on other things, should we come up with any, like Nico_Davout's proposition of a bonus action);
3. Luck Points reset to skill value at the end of each adventure, when CPs are awarded;
4. The entire function of the Luck skill is to provide Luck Points, it is not actually rolled for anything;
5. The starting skill level of Luck is 6D, just like, and instead of, the number of CPs beginning characters get now;
6. Luck has to be advanced like any other skill, one pip at a time;
7. However only a full die provides an actual Luck Point - just like with CPs, you cannot divide the bonus die they provide into pips to be used separately, so pips in the skill don't count;
8. The CP cost of increasing the Luck skill is double the number of dice per pip, like with Advanced Skills;
9. The Luck skill is currently disconnected from any attribute, but may be tied into the Force attribute should I ever implement it.

Playtesting will help determine if the 6D starting level for Luck is too much, and weather the CP cost of rising it is too high for anyone to ever bother. I could see starting it at 5D, or even 4D, but having it cost like a normal skill to increase. We'll see.
_________________
Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quetzacotl
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Posts: 281
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, sounds good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Leon The Lion wrote:
'Key, we've drifted way off topic here. Not that I mind, really. It's completely natural for conversations.


Embarassed Sprry, my bad. I should change my handle to ThreadJacker. Embarassed


Leon The Lion wrote:

Anyway, the main subject is complete I guess. I got some opinions and advice - some of which I even agreed with and will use Razz - and decided on a beta shape for the house rule.


Well, you could tell us what you finally go with and how it works out for you. My shrink says closure is important. Wink

Quote:

We can by all means use the rest of the thread to continue to b**** about D&D. Wink


Or set up another thread. Frankly it's not a problem with D&D per say, it a problem with players taking the D&D mindset and applying it elsewhere, no matter what, despite any proof that it won't work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon The Lion
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 309
Location: Somewhere in Poland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eh, no worries. Like I said, I don't mind. Conversations evolve. At the least I was a willing accomplice, so I've got no room to complain.

And it will be some time before I can test this. Game is currently on hiastus following one of the players moving out of the country and generally re-arrangeing her life. We're hopeing to continue playing over Skype, but it'll take some time.

Also, I may not necessarily test it in Star Wars. Generally, nowadays I consider house rules threads for utility not only for SW D6, but for the D6 system in general, as it is, or at least I want it to be, my go-to universal system for all gaming. It's just the best I've found to date, and I find it very user-friendly, easy to teach and learn, and easy to mod and create new content for. I already used it to run a Neon Exodus Evangelion game (in a very simplified form, as the solo game was more of an interactive story than traditional RPG), and am now planning to use it for a Secret of Zir'An conversion and game.
_________________
Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just thinking...
What if the players got to decide if they wanted die roll adjusting CPs , or character improving Cps (say XPs) when they are awarded? For example a PC who earns 5 points, could take 3 CPs and 2XPs (or any other mix up to 5 points total).

The GM might even decide to award a set number of die adjusting CPs per adventure, or even award both CPs and Xps.

That way you could eliminate the penalty to character improvement by spending Cps, without making any serious changes to the rules. You are really just subdividing CPS into two different types of points based on their function.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That might work.. Or just halve the awards.. half are xp, half are cp.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
That might work.. Or just halve the awards.. half are xp, half are cp.


Yup. By splitting them and awarding them separately, improving die rolls will no longer hurt character advancement. And the rule changes would be minimal.

Hmm, if a GM wanted, he could even allow a PC to convert character improvement points into die roll adjustment points if desired. Kinda a last ditch thing. But then, I don't have a problem with the RAW in this area, so I might be missing something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Draven
Sub-Lieutenant
Sub-Lieutenant


Joined: 14 Mar 2013
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Leon I think your rules might work for you problem. They seem rather solid to me and seems to fit the system. If I run into this problem I think I will use those rules as well.



Now for the D&D bashing lol.
Well not really bashing but why it became what players expect. At least where I am from D&D and what followed d20 became the norm for most games. A they were high fantasy games at that. But the system was easy to min. max. as they call it. So it appealed to players that wanted to play characters that were very powerful. It also seems to be the easiest most successful of the generic systems. Thus it spawned a lot of other games using the same system. I can not even name the list of games that fall under d20 and open 20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon The Lion
Commander
Commander


Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 309
Location: Somewhere in Poland

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll allow myself to rise this from the depths, to give an update on how the idea is working out and additional tweaks I've made. Maybe it'll be usefull to somebody.

The rules I'm currently using in my game, and which seem to work quite well for me:

Luck:
Character Points may no longer be spent for additional dice to augment rolls. Their sole function is character advancement;
Instead, characters now have the Luck "skill";
Luck is currently disconnected from any attribute, but may be tied into a Force attribute should I ever implement it;
The starting level of Luck is 5D, recieved instead of the 5 CPs beginning characters get by RAW;
Each pip in Luck gives a character one Luck Point (so each full D provides 3 Luck Points);
The entire function of Luck is to provide Luck Points, it is not actually rolled for anything;
Luck Points (LP) can be spent on augmenting attribute and skill rolls, after seeing the result of the roll, in the following ways:
1. Each LP spent adds 1 to the result of the roll;
2. Alternatively, 3 LP may be spent to add +1D to the result of the roll, but the result of the die must be accepted, even if it comes up lower than 3;
3. 3 LP may be spent when a "1" is rolled on the Wild Die to cancel any Mishap, weather Penalty or Complication, that would result;
The three uses of LP may be freely combined in one roll, in any configuration;
The maximum number of LP that may be spent on one roll is 15 for dodges, parries, and resisting Force powers, 6 otherwise;
Luck Points reset to Luck value at the end of each adventure, when CPs are awarded;
When using RAW character creation (which I don't, btw), Luck should be treated like a normal skill in all respects and may be increased as one;
After character creation, the per pip CP cost of increasing Luck is equal to double the current number of full dice in it, like with RAW Advanced Skills;
Luck has no maximum value, as long as a character pays for it, thay may increase its die code further;

Bad Luck:
A character is allowed to spend more Luck Points than he has, going into debt;
Such negative LP should be recorded as Bad Luck;
Bad Luck first comes into play in the next adventure after the one it was earned in - record all Bad Luck gained in the current adventure separately from any earlier total;
The Game Master may force a character to spend their Bad Luck Points (BLP) on degrading attribute and skill rolls, in the following ways:
1. Each BLP spent subtracts 1 from the result of the roll;
2. 3 LP may be spent when a "6" is rolled on the Wild Die to cancel the bonus die that would result;
3. 1 BLP may be spent to simply cancel one LP spent on the same roll;
The three uses of BLP may be freely combined in one roll, in any configuration;
The maximum number of BLP that a character may be forced to spend on one roll is 6 for dodges, parries, resisting Force powers, and resisting damage, 15 otherwise;
A Luck Point cancelled by a Bad Luck Point still counts as spent on the roll, normal LP spending maximums still apply;
A character may at any time spend Luck Points to cancel his Bad Luck Points, on a one-to-one basis;
Once spent or cancelled, Bad Luck Points are gone untill new ones are earned;

That's it, I believe.
_________________
Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer


Last edited by Leon The Lion on Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:12 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The starting level of Luck is 5D, recieved instead of the 6 CPs beginning characters get by RAW;


Starting characters only get 5cp, not 6. Just to make you aware.
But not bad.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
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 -> House Rules All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
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