[Mechanics] The Simplest Dice System in the World

[lostcheerio]

A Rules Light System for Streamlined Play:

This basic dice system is only one option. You can use your own, or Shadowrun, or D&D, or PBtA, or whatever other game you like. The starting scenario, character roles, plot twists, complications, and enemies, will translate into whatever system you choose. But here is one way to do it:

The Simplest Dice System in the World Players: For anything you'd like to try to do that seems possible but not guaranteed, from persuading a friend to searching a room to attacking an enemy, roll a d20. If you get a ten or higher, it works. If you get a 10, it works just barely, but if you get a 20, it works great. GMs: Only ask for rolls for things that are possible, but not guaranteed. If it's easy but not guaranteed, let them roll 2d20 and take the higher one. If it's difficult but not impossible, let them roll 2d20 and take the lower one. This is just the advantage/disadvantage mechanic from D&D, and in this system it replaces modifiers and changing DCs. So there are five kinds of challenges: Impossible: No roll. Difficult: 2d20 and take lower one. Normal: d20 Easy: 2d20 and take the higher one. Guaranteed: No roll. Keep in mind that for a success threshold of 10, advantage or disadvantage has a major impact on outcomes. If the player is suggesting a roll you haven't asked for, and believes they deserve an advantaged roll, or should have disadvantage imposed, they can give you the justification, and roll two dice. If you didn't want the advantage/disadvantage die, you can just ignore the second number. Combat: A combat check is like any other: 10 or above hits, with 20 being absolutely spectacular and 10 being a close one. Rather than the player rolling damage, the GM decides how many hits the enemy will take to stun or kill. Some will go down in one hit. Some may take three or more. This may vary depending on how many posts you have left in the game! Complications: If you want it just slightly more complicated, here are a couple more things you can add: I Miss Crits Option: Add the concept of critical hits and misses on a rolled 20 or 1. In combat a 20 is 2 hits on your enemy and a 1 is one hit on a friend. I Miss Hit Points Option: Give the enemies hit points, and then add damage rolls in combat, 1d6 for a 10-14, 2d6 for a 15-19, 3d6 for a 20. I Miss DCs Option: Instead of a threshold of 10 for everything, make some things require a 5 or 15. The advantage/disadvantage will still count most for the ones with a success threshold of 10, but this gives a little more flexibility. I Miss Modifiers Option: Instead of everyone having the same chance of doing everything, with no consideration of expertise or experience, allow players to assign a +1, +2 or +3 modifier to certain skills as they come up, claiming special expertise. They will of course have to assign a -1, -2, or -3 to other skills, to keep it even, but those can also be determined as they come up. This will require keeping track of what skills have what modifiers, but you wanted it more complicated, so.

[lostcheerio]

Discussion question: Should there be a custom DC, agreed upon by the player/DM in advance, to adjust the fail rate in this system?

I've never used this system in a solo game before -- only with groups. The fail rate is maybe pretty steep compared to D&D 5e or other games. I actually liked the steep fail rate, because I think it challenges DMs to push forward in other ways, and players to be able to cope with failure. Ya know, when you end up in prison, you might meet your best allies there! And when you die, isn't that just an opportunity to pact up?

But, this is my personal preference and others might want more successes. I'm thinking a player and GM could agree on a DC -- 11 or 12 or 13 for a high-success-rate game. 10 for more even odds. And if they both agree on a number, then that becomes the target for that game.

In defense of the system as is: One of the reasons I like the high fail rate is that I often GM larger-than-normal tables, so there's a good chance *someone* is going to succeed, but with a solo game, that gets rough. In my game with Homestarbaby, I actually liked that I died and had to pick up a new character. And I do think this kind of timeline is good for big wins or big fails, to just drive things along. Not getting too attached to a character, having a lot of NPCs lying around to be animated, etc.

Interested in your thoughts. Just shifting it to 11 instead of 10 would probably have a pretty big impact.

[rhaiber]

I like a simple system. Having only one type of roll to make for the most part made it easy for the players to engage in a fast-paced game without having to ask the GM what type of roll to make, what skills applied, how many dice to use, or what DC to beat.

That being said, I think any system (particularly a simple one) needs to be flexible enough for the GM to adapt it to the situation.

Here's how I handle rolls in the Rules Lite System.

1. I don’t see things in binary terms of total success or absolute failure. Even though the RLS says above a 10 is good and below a 10 is bad, there are different degrees. If you swing your sword and hit, maybe it’s a scratch that your enemy barely notices, maybe you hit them hard enough that they drop their weapon, maybe you cleave them in two. Likewise, when you miss, maybe your foe stepped out of the way at the last second and you missed by a fraction of an inch, maybe you trip and throw yourself off balance, maybe you impale yourself on your own blade. Just how high or low you roll can determine the extent of the result in either direction.
2. I also take the relative difficulty of a task into account. While I’m not likely to announce a specific DC to beat, if you are trying to do something really difficult, like hit a bullseye from 100 yards in a blizzard at night, then you’ll have to roll pretty well. On the other hand, if you are trying to hop over a puddle to avoid getting your new boots wet, well that won’t take much.
3. Then there is the advantage/disadvantage mechanic. I’m fairly liberal in applying this mechanic when there is justification. If you follow any gaming shows like Critical Role or Dimension20, you’ll notice that before a skill-check, the GM often tells the players to “describe for me how you’re going to do this”. Then if the player comes up with a plausible, convincing, or creative idea, the GM tells them to roll with advantage. If their idea is absurd, half-cocked, or implausible, then they might be told to roll with disadvantage.
4. Lastly, let’s talk about how magic fits into all this. You don’t need to use the mechanics of any specific spells as they’ve been written in any published books. I certainly won’t be using them. All you needs to do is form a clear enough mental image of what you want the magic to do (an image you can hopefully describe for me). If it’s clear enough, creative enough, and you can focus your willpower (that last part is what the dice will determine), then you can make anything happen.

In both my games, those basic rules determined how things went for the first half of the game or so. After that, I started adapting things to keep the game fresh, like adding in skills challenges where the player had to make a series of rolls and hope for more successes than failures, sometimes with stacking penalties or bonuses. I created a combat system that involved opposed rolls, ouchy points, and shake-it-off rolls. We even played a game of mystery rock-paper-scissors.

P.S. Oh, and no players died in either of my games (not for lack of trying on their part), but mostly because I hid all the sharp objects. My games tend to have a lighter, brighter tone. Yes, even when we are doing film noir.