[d10 Core] Chapter 2, Second Edition, please critque

#1
Looking for a little critiquing on my second chapter of my second edition. I don't want to run into the same problem as with the first edition, so I need some fresh eyes to see if what I have in the Core Principles chapter makes sense to people.

This is an uncorrected draft, so there could be a spelling error or two, and there could be some things that don't make sense (which is why I'm here!).

Some things that I will note is that Chapter X: XXX (pg. XXX) appears through the text, these are incomplete references to other locations in the book, so just treat them as dead links for now; they will be corrected in the finished version when all chapters are completely written and proper layout has been completed.

Anyhow, thanks in advance, hope to hear some good tips. If you want, feel free to write a paragraph about how you think the system works. That would help alot, my seeing how people are interpreting the writing.

The link is here: http://www.latenitebooks.com/downloads/chapter2_2ed.pdf
For clarity, the character sheet can be found here, as it is referenced a couple of times in the writing.

I went with a different writing style this time, more definitive and frank, than the last version.

Also, please be advised that an entire chapter will be devoted to skills, conditions on what make each skill easier or harder, and sample dice pools for skills for certain common tasks. I know that was a point of contention last time, but, trust me, each skill is going to be fleshed out in MUCH greater detail when I get to that chapter.

For now, I just want to see if anyone thinks there is anything glaring in the second chapter that is just plain confusing.

Thanks a bunch! Hope to hear from someone soon.

P.S. I've already noticed the Chapter 2 image on the far left (chapter tab) is missing, but appears on other pages. This will be corrected in the final version, just one that I happened to have missed.
 
#3
I think it works. Not sure how I feel about comparing highest to highest Risk style, but then again I hate adding dice and I believe it would be too powerful with just adding. As long as things are arranged so that you rarely get to rolling more than 10 dice altogether (5 per person in a contest), I would think it would play out well.

The terminology of your text focuses a bit too much on how the levels you have going are represented, I think. I do that when writing rules where the other rules haven't been written; sort of a note to self in the text. I would abstract the discussion of the left-arrows and right-arrows and then say how that is represented on the character sheets. Like:

"Skill and Attribute ranks range from five positive levels to five negative levels. A rank of 0 means you are average for the campaign in that Skill or Attribute. On your character sheet, positive levels are represented by right-hand block arrows and negative levels are represented by left-hand block arrows."
 
#4
I think it works. Not sure how I feel about comparing highest to highest Risk style, but then again I hate adding dice and I believe it would be too powerful with just adding. As long as things are arranged so that you rarely get to rolling more than 10 dice altogether (5 per person in a contest), I would think it would play out well.

The terminology of your text focuses a bit too much on how the levels you have going are represented, I think. I do that when writing rules where the other rules haven't been written; sort of a note to self in the text. I would abstract the discussion of the left-arrows and right-arrows and then say how that is represented on the character sheets. Like:

"Skill and Attribute ranks range from five positive levels to five negative levels. A rank of 0 means you are average for the campaign in that Skill or Attribute. On your character sheet, positive levels are represented by right-hand block arrows and negative levels are represented by left-hand block arrows."
Thank you very much for the feedback!

Yes, the character creation chapters will suggest new people to start with an amount of points (point-buy) that keep their highest rolls to around 2 to 4 dice at first, and allow for expansion all the way up to 10 vs. 10 once people have gotten use to how everything works.

It kinda goes off the idea that people will struggle at first to work with the system, and they will be ready to expand their gameplay into more amazing rolls as they get better at the mechanic. Similar to how the board game Risk works, people who are just starting out go kinda slow, but as the game progresses, you'll see their speeds increase and their comparison speed increase a great deal.

I agree about the arrows references. I could easily sum everything up clearly under Ratings (the second section header), and then refer to the terminology established in that section, such as the positive and negative ratings, although the circle (0) indicates that you are not good or bad at performing a task; success depends solely upon chance.

Thanks for the feedback, I hope it keeps coming.
 

symmetry

New member
Banned
#6
No more comments on the mechanic?
First off: nice work!

Personally, I'm a big advocate of 'ubiquitous opposed rolls' - so I support that aspect of your system. (of course, an "ubiquitous opposed roll" policy requires an accompanying "roll only when it matters" policy, for balance - looks like you fully intend to have that covered)

I would offer the suggestion that you explore what your opposed roll oriented engine means for the GM when s/he has to roll against NPCs.

What happens when an NPC needs to make a dexterity check?

Currently, it would appear that in such cases the GM is expected to roll for the NPC and roll for the Difficulty - ensuring the dice don't get mixed up - then do the resolution processing and 'hit' comparing as well. This might be too tedious and error prone to stomach for folks.

However you choose to deal with it, seems like this should be accounted for on page 5, in the 'Determining Opposing Dice Pools' section.

As far as the dice mechanic itself goes - it definitely looks functional, interesting and fun. I'd be curious to see how well it works in practice over the span of an entire session with moderately skilled characters though - I have an inclination to think that there might be just a bit too much rigmarole involved, what with the lining up and comparing and whatnot. (note that this could be a complete throw-away concern, because I haven't actually attempted to make any rolls using your system; perhaps its engaging enough that the potentially extra overhead becomes somewhat hidden)

An offhand suggestion regarding the dice: have you considered reading the dice as 0 through 9 rather than 1 through 10?

In the Ratings section on page 1, you say:

"Statistics and skills operate on a rating system, while abilities operate on a numeric system going upwards from zero, as described in Chapter X: XXX (pg. XXX)."

... going upwards from zero is the key point there: reading the dice as 0 to 9 would be a bit more consistent with the abilities. Also, the "ignore ones" rule would become the "ignore zeros" rule - it seems more readily and immediately intuitive to think in terms of ignoring 0. Additionally, new players won't be confronted with seeing '0' but needing to think '10'.

I admit that the first edition's core system was a bit too bland and conventional for my tastes, personally - but the second edition is definitely looking much more interesting!

Cheers
 
Last edited:
#7
First off: nice work!

Personally, I'm a big advocate of 'ubiquitous opposed rolls' - so I support that aspect of your system. (of course, an "ubiquitous opposed roll" policy requires an accompanying "roll only when it matters" policy, for balance - looks like you fully intend to have that covered)

I would offer the suggestion that you explore what your opposed roll oriented engine means for the GM when s/he has to roll against NPCs.

What happens when an NPC needs to make a dexterity check?

Currently, it would appear that in such cases the GM is expected to roll for the NPC and roll for the Difficulty - ensuring the dice don't get mixed up - then do the resolution processing and 'hit' comparing as well. This might be too tedious and error prone to stomach for folks.
You know, this is something I actually hadn't thought about until you said that. I'll definitely have to think about that one.

However you choose to deal with it, seems like this should be accounted for on page 5, in the 'Determining Opposing Dice Pools' section.

As far as the dice mechanic itself goes - it definitely looks functional, interesting and fun. I'd be curious to see how well it works in practice over the span of an entire session with moderately skilled characters though - I have an inclination to think that there might be just a bit too much rigmarole involved, what with the lining up and comparing and whatnot. (note that this could be a complete throw-away concern, because I haven't actually attempted to make any rolls using your system; perhaps its engaging enough that the potentially extra overhead becomes somewhat hidden)
Right, if the dice pools become too big too fast, it could lead to some tedium, but, from my experience, hardcore players playing high levels in anything are usually not as concerned about the tedium of rolling alot of dice.

An offhand suggestion regarding the dice: have you considered reading the dice as 0 through 9 rather than 1 through 10?

In the Ratings section on page 1, you say:

"Statistics and skills operate on a rating system, while abilities operate on a numeric system going upwards from zero, as described in Chapter X: XXX (pg. XXX)."

... going upwards from zero is the key point there: reading the dice as 0 to 9 would be a bit more consistent with the abilities. Also, the "ignore ones" rule would become the "ignore zeros" rule - it seems more readily and immediately intuitive to think in terms of ignoring 0. Additionally, new players won't be confronted with seeing '0' but needing to think '10'.
I have considered it. I went with 0 = 10 because of the mainstream. I may add that in as an optional rule, one that is established at the beginning of play, and based upon what the group thinks might be best. The probabilities work out the same. Veteran gamers might prefer to use "the old way", while beginner groups may take the literal face of the die to make things easier.

Abilities are special powers, with "something else (TM)" being unlocked at each level of progression. The ability itself isn't rolled. Instead, an associated skill is rolled to determine success. For instance, a player could have an ability called "Magic" at level 4, and to perform magic, he would roll something like "Knowledge: Magical" or "Craft: Magic" as opposed to rolling the amount of points in the ability. I should probably clarify that early on.

I admit that the first edition's core system was a bit too bland and conventional for my tastes, personally - but the second edition is definitely looking much more interesting!

Cheers
I agree. With first edition, I think I was just playing it safe and didn't allow myself to go out and explore other options. Tried and true turned out to be overdone. I decided to, instead, make a system that I really liked and put the idea out there to see what some people took from it.

Any more thoughts? Anyone?
 
Last edited:

symmetry

New member
Banned
#8
[...] but, from my experience, hardcore players playing high levels in anything are usually not as concerned about the tedium of rolling alot of dice.
heheh - right on!


With first edition, I think I was just playing it safe and didn't allow myself to go out and explore other options. Tried and true turned out to be overdone. I decided to, instead, make a system that I really liked and put the idea out there to see what some people took from it.
Most excellent.
 
Top Bottom