I am trying to introduce someone to D&D, but they are having difficultly keeping track of the different dice; bonuses and so forth. They have requested an option to play with only 1 die, and not have to add or subtract anything. I am looking for the best way of managing this. I have an idea, but I am interested in input on my proposed solution.
At present, I am thinking of having it based on rolling under an ability score. So instead of scaling difficulties, it would simply measure your base abilities. So, a ranged attack would, for instance, simply be a matter of trying to roll under your dexterity. A higher dexterity just means more numbers that will yield success. I haven't currently been integrating skills yet, and based on her reactions to the rest of it, I doubt it's a good idea. Too many things to keep track of.
What does anyone think? Is this sufficient? A bad idea? Any suggestions or improvements?
I think you're pretty much doing a new player a disservice if you're trying to introduce someone to D&D but you've changed the core system so that it's unrecognizable as any modern variant of D&D. One option that greatly simplifies things but keeps the core system much more recognizably D&D is if you (as DM) pre-compute all of the modifiers and simply give the player a target number on the d20. For combat rolls, you can use average damage, which makes the whole thing pretty deterministic but that likely doesn't matter at this level.
For example, if the player is attacking an AC 12 monster with a +5 attack bonus and a weapon that does d8+4 damage, you'd simplify this down to telling her that she needs to roll a 7 or higher to hit, and the hit does 9 damage every time.
An advantage to doing it this way is that as the player learns you can seamlessly add in more and more "real" D&D.
You could just roll all the dice for her. Or get a copy of her character sheet so that you can add modifiers yourself. If doing math in her head is what's unfun you could look into doing all the rolling using online/digital dice that calculate bonuses for her.
Honestly, though, if someone doesn't like the basic math and different dice types, to the point where they're unable to enjoy the game, D&D is probably not the game for them. There are other games out there that use only a single dice type, such as the D6 system (http://games.whitesaber.com/west-end-games-open-d6.html), GURPS, or Fudge/Fate (I guess they have some odd die types, technically, but still). Those all still invovle some modifiers, but they're generally simpler than D&D.
Since SH said the goal was to "introduce someone to D&D" I thought that using some form of something that could be called D&D was a requirement. If that actually isn't the case, and it's a more general introduction to RPGs-- then, yes, I also think maybe a simpler game might actually work better. I'd recommend Fate of course, but then again, I would.
GURPS does indeed only use a single type of die but it is not a system I'd recommend to someone who is opposed to math or complicated systems... :grin:
I wanted it to be some form of D&D, but it is true, this might not be a game she can actually enjoy. I may end up having to go a different route with this.
How much has she actually played? A new player reading over the rules without actually having played might find all the dice fairly daunting, but in practice (read: in my experience) it's pretty simple. If anything I think trying to keep whatever dice straight should pretty quickly dissolve into some peripheral aspect of the game assuming they're having fun.
I had a very young player who wanted to play D&D and had a hard time with dice, calculating various character aspects (saves, AC, etc.), and even though it took a fair amount of time for them to really get the hang of it, it didn't seem to bother them as long as someone was helping.
True20?
I just checked out True20, and while it does fulfill the "only one kind of dice" requirement, I am starting the think that Sparkle and Steerpike are correct, and that D&D isn't likely to work for her. I need to work out something new. I think I will work on something new that has some of the trappings of D&D, but is much simpler (maybe working in some Fate elements.)
Why are you doubting their ability to work with the numbers? I've played with no less than 5 people who had never played before, though they had played CRPGs before.
Quote from: Xeviat
Why are you doubting their ability to work with the numbers? I've played with no less than 5 people who had never played before, though they had played CRPGs before.
Not because she's new to it, because she's actually having trouble with the numbers. It's been making it un-fun for her, having to think about it. It's not a case of worrying about a potential problem, it's something that's actually come up.
Ok, the basics of the system I am trying to put together:
Stats (aka "Limits"): There will be 4 base "Abilities" collectively known as a character's "Limits." These represent the Ability of the character to successfully handle certain situations. Arranged on a scale of 0-9, checks are made with a d10, attempting to roll under your Limit. If it falls within the range of your abilities, you succeed. If the roll is higher, you fail.
Limit-Break: This will be a mechanic analogous to action points, accrued for good roleplaying, which allows you to momentarily exceed your limitations and achieve something greater.
Aspects: As in Fate, these can represent skills, personality traits, character background, and anything else that makes sense.
I may incorporate some kind of "Class Powers," but then again, I also might just roll that into aspects.
The other thing I am debating the details of is health and damage. On the one hand, I was thinking that I might have that too be entirely aspect-based, such that when a character is hit by an attack, they gain an aspect such as "Sprained Ankle" or "Concussion" which they have to work into the way they play their characters.
On the other hand, I was considering a "wound box" mechanic. In this case, there would be a track of wound boxes for each of the Limits (Physical Endurance, Mental Health & Strain, Composure, and Precision) As they lose "Might" boxes, they get closer to unconsciousness or death. As they lose "mind" boxes, they grow closer to madness and/or brain damage. Losing "Presence" could mean losing your courage or having a nervous breakdown. Taking "Reflex" damage would indicate sluggishness and fatigue, making one dizzy or clumsy.
And of course, I could combine them, (providing a new aspect at certain "damage" checkpoints) though that would complicate things.
Any thoughts or opinions? Suggestions?
Quote from: Seraflumphaccrued for good roleplaying
While I'm certainly in favor of mechanics that connect mechanics and roleplay, I don't think that rewarding "good roleplaying" is a particularly worthwhile way to do it. If every bit of RP that could be considered "good" gets a mechanical reward, then the math of the system starts to rely on these bonuses being more or less permanent, and you end up with the Exalted stunt system. Worse, players might get offended if the bonus isn't given-- especially for something they thought was clever-- because not giving the reward is basically saying "no, that bit of RP you thought was cool apparently wasn't."
I prefer the approach taken by Fate and some other systems, where you receive the game's "awesome points" in response to giving into your character's weaknesses and/or allowing the GM to mess about with your character or the plot in ways not normally permitted by the rules.
Quote from: sparkletwist
Quote from: Seraflumphaccrued for good roleplaying
While I'm certainly in favor of mechanics that connect mechanics and roleplay, I don't think that rewarding "good roleplaying" is a particularly worthwhile way to do it. If every bit of RP that could be considered "good" gets a mechanical reward, then the math of the system starts to rely on these bonuses being more or less permanent, and you end up with the Exalted stunt system. Worse, players might get offended if the bonus isn't given-- especially for something they thought was clever-- because not giving the reward is basically saying "no, that bit of RP you thought was cool apparently wasn't."
I prefer the approach taken by Fate and some other systems, where you receive the game's "awesome points" in response to giving into your character's weaknesses and/or allowing the GM to mess about with your character or the plot in ways not normally permitted by the rules.
Actually the way you describe is more what I meant. I was being vague (and a tad rushed) with it and didn't explain it well. By the inadequate phrase "good roleplaying" I meant that kind of "playing to your aspects" in ways that add complications.
Any thoughts on wound boxes vs. totally freeform, aspect-based health?
Since the goal of the system is to introduce a new player, I'd recommend not trying to get too realistic or clever with the damage system and go with something easy to understand and use. Something too freeform might be difficult for a new player (or anyone) to grasp and could lead to confusion and frustration. Hit points, for all their flaws, are actually pretty good in this regard. Something like wound boxes might work similarly, but having too many different tracks could get confusing, also. I'd also advise to take a more RPG-ish approach of characters being at full capability until they fall down, rather than any sort of major ongoing penalty for taking damage, as this can lead to a "death spiral" effect that is frustrating to anyone and might be especially discouraging to a new player; if you do have wound penalties, I think that capping them at a very modest level would be a good idea.
I think you're probably right on that point, Sparkle. Better to not bog it down in "health damage" and "mind damage." At least not right away. Just stick to basic HP or wound boxes (just one set) until she's real comfortable and willing to make it more intricate.