Champions Diceless Role-playing

[BNakagawa]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Well, as I said, I've seen it done. The degree of effectiveness was determined by how much you made the roll _by_, assuming a roll of 11.

 

So if an 11 hit by like 6 (more?), you did maximum damage, if it hit exactly you did minimum damage, stuff like that.

 

It's the full Champions deal, it's just there's no 'getting lucky', unless that IS your power - there's just situational modifiers.

 

Ick.

 

Darkness field with personal immunity plus 4d6KA = 120 stun pretty much all the time.

[assault]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Here's a site about a systemless (diceless) superhero game:

http://www.uq.net.au/~zzjohnsg/superfriends.htm

 

It's rather tongue in cheek, of course, but could be played straight.

 

There is also some Hero System content elsewhere on the site.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Ick.

 

Darkness field with personal immunity plus 4d6KA = 120 stun pretty much all the time.

 

....time to take Enhanced Sense, eh?

 

Also, there's the isssue of range modifiers/mobility.

 

And isn't 'you can't hit me, I can hit you' pretty dmn effective anyway?

 

And it may have been a bit slower, and I think KA's progressed on a different chart. But it's all a blur now. (shrug)

[CourtFool]

Llamas can figure, I think...

 

Is that in reaction to my comment? I don't see how you figure.

 

It was in reaction to a lot of comments, but hey, if the glass slipper fits...

 

It was meant in good humor.

[Zed-F]

Re: Llamas can figure, I think...

 

It was in reaction to a lot of comments, but hey, if the glass slipper fits...

 

It was meant in good humor.

Alright. The problem was that it didn't fit.

[teh bunneh]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Ok' date=' that sounds much more reasonable than what you described earlier. I got the impression the tracker in the above example was given NO information about the conditions surrounding the attempt, or what he was capable of doing. It looked like all decisions were being made based purely on trial-and-error. [/quote']

 

No worries. I wasn't 100% clear in my original description. It was a fun game, and the players really got into it (some of them, in fact, keep asking me to bring it back).

[levi]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

In our group, we allow the use of the Standard Effect rule (counting all dice as 3's) for Powers. Players rarely use it, there is something satisfying about rolling a handful of dice when your character smacks Mechanon in his titanium alloy gut.

 

I personally like to use Standard Effects for my Mentalist, where a bad roll could make your all-or-nothing mental powers even less useful.

 

It is also useful for fighting agents and minions, we have even allowed the use of taking an 11 on attack rolls when fighting these types of minor threats, just to speed things up.

 

I like to use Standard Effect for villains too, this way I can more accurately plot out a fight scene. Of course, this never applies to the final showdown which is more satisfying for the players when they know it could go either way.

[Zed-F]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

I usually don't like using Standard Effect 'cause I don't usually feel like getting gypped for a half-point of effect per die. But I have used it occasionally for adjustment powers and so forth for simplicity when you start having to keep track of things you don't normally keep track of.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

....time to take Enhanced Sense, eh?

 

Also, there's the isssue of range modifiers/mobility.

 

And isn't 'you can't hit me, I can hit you' pretty dmn effective anyway?

 

And it may have been a bit slower, and I think KA's progressed on a different chart. But it's all a blur now. (shrug)

 

Perhaps. In general, scaling damage with accuracy is a dumb idea.

 

Historically, cvs and damage/defenses have been inversely proportional. Martial artists typically have the highest CVs and the lower end damage and defenses, conversely bricks have the lowest CVs and the highest damage and defenses.

 

If you allow accuracy to affect damage as you describe, the CVs now influence the damage inflicted and reduce the damage received.

 

Dex becomes all important and 2 point CSLs are lethal. Everything needs to be rewritten to keep them functioning properly and nobody on earth wants to play a slow brick. Martial artists line up to *****-slap Grond into unconsciousness.

[incrdbil]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

I usually don't like using Standard Effect 'cause I don't usually feel like getting gypped for a half-point of effect per die.

 

Call me a heretic--I allow the full 3.5 averge for standard effect.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Call me a heretic--I allow the full 3.5 averge for standard effect.

HERETIC! but one with a good idea.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Perhaps. In general, scaling damage with accuracy is a dumb idea.

 

Historically, cvs and damage/defenses have been inversely proportional. Martial artists typically have the highest CVs and the lower end damage and defenses, conversely bricks have the lowest CVs and the highest damage and defenses.

 

If you allow accuracy to affect damage as you describe, the CVs now influence the damage inflicted and reduce the damage received.

 

Dex becomes all important and 2 point CSLs are lethal. Everything needs to be rewritten to keep them functioning properly and nobody on earth wants to play a slow brick. Martial artists line up to *****-slap Grond into unconsciousness.

 

8d6 maximised = 48

12d6 average = 42

 

Situational +4 OCV = priceless.

 

 

Bricks just rolling the dice until they hit martial artists is stupid. 'Ooh! A 4! I win!'. It's also non-genre - you use tactics, objects, and distractions instead.

 

I mean, it's not like 'I can't hit, ever' wasn't hopeless to begin with. And 'I can't hurt him' - well - you're a brick. Don't try and PUNCH OUT the martial artist.

 

(The brick with higher diceage is still better in one noticeable way: setting up a big attack. Lower their DCV through surprise or whatever, and WIN!)

 

 

It would require you to keep CV's in the same general range, but who doesn't do that already? Really.

[Moidalyza]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

http://home.att.net/~georgeandrachel/capes/home01.htm

 

This is a Game I played a few times run bye the Creator himself.

 

We build the basic charater then After "the accident" we were asked what kind of powers we wanted and the GM did the mechanics. Its lot of fun Roleplaying what you are capable of and trying out new things on the spur of the momnet.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

8d6 maximised = 48

12d6 average = 42

 

Situational +4 OCV = priceless.

 

 

Bricks just rolling the dice until they hit martial artists is stupid. 'Ooh! A 4! I win!'. It's also non-genre - you use tactics, objects, and distractions instead.

 

I mean, it's not like 'I can't hit, ever' wasn't hopeless to begin with. And 'I can't hurt him' - well - you're a brick. Don't try and PUNCH OUT the martial artist.

 

(The brick with higher diceage is still better in one noticeable way: setting up a big attack. Lower their DCV through surprise or whatever, and WIN!)

 

 

It would require you to keep CV's in the same general range, but who doesn't do that already? Really.

 

So it's more in-genre for bricks to be scrambling for environmental or situational advantages in order to defeat the unstoppable martial artists?

 

Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?

 

Normally, it's the bricks who have the inherent advantages and the martial artists who have to be inventive and creative to squeak out a win.

 

And requiring inventiveness or creativity out of a brick (who are categorically revered for their clear-headedness and intellect) is asking rather a lot.

 

When was the last time you saw a martial artist PC with a berserk? When was the last villainous brick you saw who didn't have one? Or at the least an enraged that was really easy to trigger...

 

Suddenly, it becomes tragically easy to defeat every brick in the book by mind controlling them (or simply tricking the really dumb ones) to perform a haymaker. Then everyone lights them up for max damage with every hit. Instant KO.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

So it's more in-genre for bricks to be scrambling for environmental or situational advantages in order to defeat the unstoppable martial artists?

 

Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?

 

They usually have a lot of trouble hitting the fast, agile guys - and what hits they get are likely to be a fraction of their full power (which is what a 'missed by four' hit *is*).

 

Of course, the second you grab a lamp post, you can flatten them with your superior number of damage dice.

 

Normally, it's the bricks who have the inherent advantages and the martial artists who have to be inventive and creative to squeak out a win.

 

And requiring inventiveness or creativity out of a brick (who are categorically revered for their clear-headedness and intellect) is asking rather a lot.

 

Give me some examples where a slow brick _won_ a fight against a martial artist by punching them face to face.

 

Now, think of times where they blindsided them, grabbed a big object, or flattened a guy who slipped.

 

D&D style combat (stand still and punch each other) is not genre.

 

When was the last time you saw a martial artist PC with a berserk? When was the last villainous brick you saw who didn't have one? Or at the least an enraged that was really easy to trigger...

 

Suddenly, it becomes tragically easy to defeat every brick in the book by mind controlling them (or simply tricking the really dumb ones) to perform a haymaker. Then everyone lights them up for max damage with every hit. Instant KO.

 

Berserk does not incline you to Haymaker. And _anyone_ can instantly fold to that trick, not just bricks (thank you 5th ed) - that's not a brick specific problem (heck, a Martial Artist is infinitely MORE screwed, since they don't have much defenses). (I'd recommend either making that a 'suicide' level MC command, or just taking away Haymaker as an option)

[Matt Frisbee]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Bricks just rolling the dice until they hit martial artists is stupid. 'Ooh! A 4! I win!'. It's also non-genre - you use tactics, objects, and distractions instead.

 

I mean, it's not like 'I can't hit, ever' wasn't hopeless to begin with. And 'I can't hurt him' - well - you're a brick. Don't try and PUNCH OUT the martial artist.

 

A much simpler solution to the above problem would be for the brick to grab a car with his or her casual strength and splatter said martial artist with the convenience of a multi-hex object (taking full advantage of the bonus to OCV).

 

Matt "Mongo-like-hit-people!" Frisbee

[Chuckg]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

If anybody cares, just got a paper copy of Theatrix in mail-order from Titan Games. Intend to run a playtest with it this weekend to see if it operates as good as it looks (not in the supers genre, tho, am starting with something less ambitious to help me calibrate).

 

So far, I *really* like what I'm lookin' at, and thanks to the people who gave me the tip that it existed.

[Zed-F]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

You're most welcome. If you were running by PBEM, I might even be interested. However, as I expect it's to be FtF...

[Chuckg]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Actually, it's going to be in an AIM chatroom this [edit]

 

Never mind Sunday afternoon, people had to reschedule. God only knows when it'll be now.

[Publius]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

I've been sore temped by Amber but never played...I think you'd be better off adapting Amber to supers rather than trying to de-dice Hero

I have been an Amber player since the game first came out and I have played at several of the Ambercon Conventions where they have done just that: adapt Amber to Superhero use. In fact the number of non-Amber games have slowly crept up on Amber games at the last two Ambercons I have attended. I have also had great success with non-Amber games in the past: my Matrix Game was very well recieved (the Matrix lends itself to Diceless play) and the sheer number of Superhero Amber spinoffs speaks to their quality. I am thinking a Sin City game for this upcoming year's Con...

 

Amber is a blast with a good GM and good players. It sucks with a bad GM and poor players. Kind of like any other game. But they aren't necessarily "good" or "bad" gamers/GMs in other settings. Some gamers cannot wrap their heads around the diceless concept, and others take to it like second-nature.

 

In Amber the key to everything is the story and the mutual enjoyment of the people around the table. These two elements must be in balance with one another for a good session. The emphasis on story is the idea that every action in the game, every sequence and event, is designed to propel the story forward. The classic example is the old random moster tables in D&D. Why bother? Either the game needs a combat event to take place or it doesn't and the GM has to make that decision. The Players run into opposition. Should this be a hard fight where the players are pressed against the wall or a speed bump on the way to the next clue? The GM sets that up and determines that rather than random dice rolls. Mututal enjoyment means that the play is going to be fun for everyone at the table. Don't screw them over artlessly (an artful screw-over is a different matter, many times the players enjoy them as much as the GMs), don't make it entirely too easy.

 

If there is a soft spot in Diceless it is combat. "Soft" here in that it is potentially problematic, not necessarily so. It is tough to GM good combats without dice, but it can be done in a way that is challenging and fair. This is where I have taken exception to some Amber GMs who belive that all comes down ultimately to the Warfare Stat. For me, differences in pure ability are secondary to differences in tactics. If you make dumb choices you are going to bleed over them. If you make smart choices you may be able to outfight your opponent who is technically better. For minions, it is okay to play them stupid or smart because they are generally not as good and are just the warm-up anyway. For the main bad guys it is harder, because you have to play them smart but not tip the scale. I have found that writing down actions secretly for a 'mutual reveal' is one of the best options to maintain fairness; then modify by raw ability (the Warfare stat) and see what happens. Some Players (and even some GMs) however have the "I have a better stat so I can do something brutally stupid and still win" mentality.

[Rapier]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

I just did a quick scan (it IS 3am, afterall) through the thread.

 

I agree with many that Hero may not be the best system to go diceless. There is just too much concentration on the nitty-math-gritty. A Tri-Stat may be more appropriate for conversion, and there are even a half dozen or so Tri-Stat SuperHero systems out there.

 

However, if you are dead set on converting Hero to diceless simply Standard Effect everything. Its probably the simplest way to go.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

The problem with that, though, is that means there are a large number of attacks that will never be able to affect certain people at all, while with the randomness you at least have a chance.

 

Example: You're an Energy Projector with a 7d6 AoE: Radius attack. It's good against agents, and generally won't do much to a decently-defended brick (say, with a PD & ED of 25) but you've got about a 50% chance of getting at least some Stun through his defenses. Going Standard Effect on everything means you've got no chance to hurt that guy.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

I think it might be useful to "story out" some elements of plot resolution--having the Avengers/JLA level team have to plod through a fight with a couple dozen agents, en route to fighting the main bad guy(s) is probably just a formula for boring everyone to death.

High level games could benefit from fewer dice rolls...

[Zed-F]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Diceless != standard effect.

 

Diceless is all about creating a purely narrative story environment. Things work the way they work because that's what's best for the story. Hopefully they do so without throwing concepts like 'realism' or 'internal consistency' out the door, but even so, simulation and diceless are two concepts that generally do not go hand in hand very well. Random chance does have a role to play in most simulations that hope to model reality.

 

If you want to retain things like the Hero System combat mechanics, then don't go diceless. Papering over the sim nature of Hero's combat rules by instituting standard effect and calling that 'diceless' is a disservice to both the Hero System and to actual diceless games, which approach conflict resolution from a completely different perspective.

 

This is not to say diceless is better; I enjoy Hero's sim approach just as well as if not more than a good diceless approach.

[Rapier]

Re: Champions Diceless Role-playing

 

Diceless != standard effect.

 

Diceless is all about creating a purely narrative story environment. Things work the way they work because that's what's best for the story. Hopefully they do so without throwing concepts like 'realism' or 'internal consistency' out the door, but even so, simulation and diceless are two concepts that generally do not go hand in hand very well. Random chance does have a role to play in most simulations that hope to model reality.

 

If you want to retain things like the Hero System combat mechanics, then don't go diceless. Papering over the sim nature of Hero's combat rules by instituting standard effect and calling that 'diceless' is a disservice to both the Hero System and to actual diceless games, which approach conflict resolution from a completely different perspective.

 

This is not to say diceless is better; I enjoy Hero's sim approach just as well as if not more than a good diceless approach.

 

I agree completely. To take the granularity and math of Hero and try to dumb it down to some kind of diceless system is working completely backwards.