New Effect System Idea
Here’s a new thought for handling Effect and Resistance. (See the linked Cutter sheet for reference).
When you make an Action roll, your highest die is your action result. Your second highest die is your Effect result. That’s how many segments you mark on a progress clock.
This number is modified by your character’s Effect ratings, as shown on the Cutter’s sheet. If the Cutter was attacking someone with Force, then their effect result would have a 0 modifier. But if they were scrutinizing something with Insight, they would take a -1 segment modifier to effect.
A fine item adds +1 segment. Teamwork will affect this as well (TBD).
For Resistance you make a roll just as you do now to determine the stress cost, using the number of diamonds in your effect rating as your dice pool. There are no other modifiers to this pool! So no more devil’s bargains or anything to modify resistance and slow down the process. You just pick up that many dice and roll, easy peasy.
What do you think?
A few notes:
– Critical results might change slightly. I’m still thinking about that.
– You could have the option to choose which die counted for action and for effect (keeping the highest for effect and second highest for action, say). That might be good, but I’m sticking with no-exceptions to the rule for now.
– If you don’t have a second die result, it counts as a 1.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lbgak3hzf30eaeh/blades_new_effect_cutter_sample.pdf?dl=0
Oh, btw, the “Power” effect stands for willpower and influence over others.
Excellent. Elegant. Keeps the gamble. Reduces pool-building time. Sold.
I am only a little sad that resistance rolls aren’t modified by fine items. Some items seem particularly based around resistance, such as spiritbane charms (that everybody has), or spirit masks, etc, or even certain weapons if resisting a physical blow.
I really like how the only way allies can help someone else resist is by taking the entire blow (the Backup move) rather than ‘assisting’ you for just 1 stress. That’s more exciting and probably leads to more bonding and gratitude within the crew.
Do particularly potent effects still give -1d to the Resistance roll as before? This modifier seems like it takes less negotiation, the GM either says it is or it isn’t. (fine items for resistence also seem like they require little negotiation, but so it is)
I’m a big fan. Very big fan. But “Power” doesn’t seem like the right word. What about just “Influence” since that’s what you describe it doing (doesn’t really cover willpower I guess…)
That’s a tough word, yeah. I also like “Control” as in “keep control yourself” and “control others.”
While there may have been too many effects previously, I anticipate missing something related to panache and style (formerly finesse). Would that now fall under Power/Influence?
I’d probably prefer Force and Power to be more different, even if it just means a different word.
Adam Minnie Hmmm, yeah, I can see a case for fine items counting as a bonus die to Resistance. I’m not opposed to that.
And yeah, potent threats would yield -1d.
Finesse now falls under Maneuver.
Ninja’d. Control is nice. It also fits lots of the supernatural business Will and Influence were formerly used for though now I can imagine some nice Whisper uses of all the others and that broadening out is nice.
Ah, so my cult making an impressively spectacular effect on an audience of would-be proselytes could use either Maneuver (if it’s largely physical or smoke and mirrors) or Power/Control/Influence if largely charisma, emotional showmanship, or force of personality.
Control is good. I’d go with that. (Possible alternates from thesaurus: bridle or dominate)
Adam Minnie If you were using your cultists, you’d use one of the crew effect ratings, instead. Probably “Gangs.”
“I can see a case for fine items counting as a bonus die to Resistance. I’m not opposed to that.
And yeah, potent threats would yield -1d.”
Beautiful. I’ll try this in play tomorrow or this weekend. I’ll be curious about any thoughts you have on Teamwork and crits.
Also, with four resistances, I’m hoping this will help GMs come up with dangers for the action roll. You can think of four categories of danger, basically:
Control: You might be intimidated or affected by spirits / magic.
Force: You might get hurt.
Insight: You might miss something important or be fooled.
Maneuver: You might be cut off, surrounded, trapped. You might be detected.
John Harper Very true with the Gang effect, and possibly Lair for scenery and effects. So far, in this particular instance, the PCs are the lone spectacle-makers and showmen.
I suppose crew effect ratings will also be modified with the -1/0/+1/+2 columns?
Yep, crew effects would follow suit.
Question: How do effects advance now (if they do)? I don’t see Effect tick boxes on the Cutter example. Is gaining an effect diamond now an option when you fill playbook advancement (instead of a new special ability or two items from another playbook)?
I don’t see the benefit of the new handling of the effect roll.
It would change critical results a lot and it occurs to me that the results needed a different scale as its more unlikely to get a 6 or even a critical for the effect roll.
It appears as well to punish twice if one can only muster 1d for the action roll.
Plus I do consider the teamwork aspect as something very integral. That its TBD doesn’t leave a good feel.
Jennifer Fuss The number on the die is the number of segments you fill. So if your second highest is a 4, you get 4 segments (modified by your rating).
The average segments filled goes up slightly overall.
The teamwork aspect will still be integral and only slightly modified (of course!). Don’t worry!
Would you anticipate clocks being slightly larger on average? Baseline still four segments with most efforts falling into a similar 1/2/4 “hit” range?
I think this approach shows some promise.
(cross posted)
So, I roll 6, 6, 1. Does that mean a crit on my action roll and a 6 on my effect, or a 1 on my effect? I assume the former, and that’s what you’re talking about when you’re talking about changes to criticals.
In any case, I like this much more than I liked the first ‘static effect’ idea. Not sure I like it as much as the system in the quickstart, but it looks good (and I might come around).
It makes me think of a system where, for action rolls, you add Action + Effect, getting +1d for Fine Item, Devil’s Bargain, etc., and then splitting up the dice between your action and effect. I’m sure you’ve also thought of that, but it’s what it brings to mind for me.
Matthew Gagan yeah, I think 6-clocks would be a bit more standard with this system.
Bryan Chavez I’ve considered a system like that, yeah. It’s really easy to “overload” one side or the other, so you’re guaranteed a 6. If you pump all your dice into Action, you can get by with no dangers manifesting and plink down the clocks 1 bit at a time. Kind boring.
Another scenario: If I roll 1 segment without a fine item, etc, and have only 1 diamond in the related rating (meaning -1 segment) or have a diminished effect reduce it, would I overcome 0 segments with the effect or is there a minimum of 1 to support “no whiffing”?
Another counter to slightly raising the avg segments filled would be shifting the modifier to -2/-1/0/+1. But I’m sure you have great rationale for the modifier span you posted here. Also then you may end up with 0 segments more often.
John Harper What kind of madcap auteur design is this? 1d6 damage with a -1 to +2 strength modifier? It’ll never work!
Matthew Gagan I know, right? I’m a mad genius! Avant Garde forever!!!!
John Harper Yeah, that’d be what I’d see as the problem with it, too. For it to work, you’d have to implement a timer system, too, so that plinking is absolutely not a preferable state of affairs.
Say I have a perfect storm of awesome:
A 6 on my second die, +2 from my 4 diamonds (I’m a veteran badass), +1 from a fine item, +[bonus] from crit? +[bonus] from Teamwork Set Up?
= 9 (maybe up to 11+) segments overcome in one roll 😀
Adam Minnie I think there’s a minimum of 1 segment of effect, same as the current system.
I actually did start out with -2 as the first level, but it’s such a bummer to have that as a stat. Better to tweak the standard clock, I think.
I like that Finesse and Maneuver are pulled together (didn’t find the old Maneuver much useful).
I don’t like Power so much – how about using Clout? (of switch clout with sway?).
The second die is effect mechanics resembles a lot the Cortex Plus Heroic (Marvel Heroic) dice system. Probably worth checking it out in comparison.
I still wonder if it would be good to have an optional Effect roll for certain situations.
What if, for reasons, you wanted to to have a higher effect than action? Does it seem off to let you pick which one takes the highest and which takes the second highest?
I’m thinking along the lines of a situation where I rolled 6,4, and 3. I know that if I give the 6 to the effect I will finish off the clock, but if I go with the 4 I do not. The danger is something I am ok with facing on my action roll of 4, so I decide to finish the clock this turn.
You can’t change horses mid stream!!!
Yeah, George Pitre I actually mentioned that option, above. It may be worth including.
Hahahaha, Ben Jarvis. The orthodoxy of the early adopter! A tragic plight. 🙂
Oops, sorry I missed it. Incidentally I like this way much more than the static method.
You know your game is a success when you get your first grognards before it’s even officially released. I’m going to enjoy grumping around about the only real way to run Action and Effect.
I like it, I think it’s a step in the right direction.
Something to consider is the distribution of ‘second highest die’. For people chucking 2d, that means Effect will generally be ‘the worst of two dice’. Perhaps clocks will tend to be smaller?
Averages of 5000 trials:
1d Best: 3.5098 Effect: 1.0
2d Best: 4.4742 Effect: 2.556
3d Best: 4.9732 Effect: 3.5038
4d Best: 5.244 Effect: 4.0796
5d Best: 5.4218 Effect: 4.4932
6d Best: 5.5596 Effect: 4.7706
I wondered if it improves the ROI of putting more dice into your best action, since it takes way more dice to reliably get two good results than it does to get one, but it seems that once you’ve got 2 or 3d in something, pips in Effects are more directly useful.
Yeah, I ran those numbers, too. At 2d, an Effect average of 2.5 segments is pretty good. Slightly up from the average of 2 in the current system.
Just thinking more about the Effects categories. Essentially, it’s good to have these four covered:
1. Physical/~Strength (Force)
2. Physical/~Dexterity (Maneuver/Finesse)
3. Social/Emotional/~Sense Supernatural (Intuition)
4. Mental/~Control Supernatural (Willpower/Resolve)
At first glance this looks really good! I haven’t tried it or ran the numbers though, but I think I like it! On the topic for Power/Control, or whatever it’ll be called, I’d like to weigh in and suggest Will, as in both personal willpower and enforcing your will over others.
John Harper Of course you did, I should have known!
Michael Prescott But I appreciate the verification! 🙂
What about Force, Finesse, Insight, Will?
My suggestions above are because it was bugging me that Maneuver was seeming more like a verb when the rest are nouns that could follow the phrase “with _.”
I know “manuever” is technically a noun also, but I want to be able to say “I murder with force” or “I cipher with insight” or “I stalk with finesse” etc
Yeah, that was basically the original set, Adam Minnie (see the Ghost Lines stats). It’s a pretty good grouping. I also like being able to say “with _“
Finesse doesn’t really capture the right feel for some things, though. Running wildly across the rooftops to evade capture isn’t finesse. 🙂
Cool, can’t wait to try this out. I really like that Devil’s Bargain and Helping is only calculated once now. I solo playtested the static method last night, and it worked pretty well – faster, and without any real loss of drama (from what I could tell, solo). This new method adds a lot more randomness to the effect, so I wonder if that will produce more tension/interesting scenes.
Thanks for testing these ideas out, Dan Hall!
interesting direction. And now i’dont know witch rule i’ll play for my first session….
I think the old way is good, but needs to be explained a little better than now. I’m finding hard to manage things because actually I didn’t unterstand well how this mechanics works. Today’s explanation helped a little more.
Is there a chance the QS will be changed to reflect this?
For a instent reading you could use a colored dice in your rolling. This dice serve for the action roll (like any other dice), but its number is also use for the effect result + or – your effect diamonds and fine item. It’s the classical damage dice in the action roll.
John Harper you could run wildly across the rooftops with force. 🙂 Or a barreling run through crowds. Someone with high Finesse shouldn’t really thrive while rampaging wildly, but someone with high Force might. With finesse you’d be more swinging flipping, rolling.
I thought no particular given effect should have to cover all of a certain type of activity, like “all physical mobility.” At some point, like in distance endurance or swimming, perhaps Power/Will/Control would actually work best. Meanwhile, finesse adds the element of doing things gently, carefully (forgery?), or with flair. 🙂
Using the second dice. Very elegant. I thought there might be a way to use the roll multiple ways. I’m liking the move away from the separate effect roll more and more.
I think this will speed play up and ramp up the tension of each roll because you’re looking for more than one high dice.
I think I like Control and Finesse as effects, because you can use them better to describe the outcome of actions. Which could actually lead to some interesting combinations… What would Stalking with Control look like? Or Murder with Finesse? Those things don’t come out sounding quite the same for me with Power and Maneuver.
I like collapsing the six Effects to four, a lot — especially with how they map to possible dangers for Action rolls. (I vote for Force, Maneuver, Insight and Influence, if that counts for anything.)
As far as combining Action and Effect into one roll… I think that would would have to grow on me. I actually like separate, good ol’ to-hit and damage rolls, but I can see the simplicity behind condensing things down to one roll. I would definitely like this better than the other ‘static’ Effect option presented.
Why wouldn’t you just add the full effect stat (instead of stat minus 2) and just continue to use the 4/6/8 clocks? Or instead take the effect stat as the minimum possible effect when you’re just rolling for action?
I guess another thought before diving into this, is what would the starting diamonds/adding to it be? You automatically get one in a playbook specific stat (Lurks getting finesse, Whispers Control, Cutters Force and Slides Insight) and then have four others to spread around where you wanted? Or mandatory one in each area and then just pick one area to get the 0 stat?
Johnstone Metzger it’s not stat -2, it’s your actual die roll. That’s the idea here.
What’s the -1 to +2 numbers above the diamonds for?
Those modify the die roll. You use your second highest die on the action roll. Maybe read the OP here again.
So, basically you are adding your effect stat minus 2 to your second highest die roll (sorry for leaving that out of my last post). Why not just add the whole stat and use progress clocks with 2 segments more than whatever would work with the numbers on the cutter sheet linked above? Why add the extra step of changing the number around?
(Also, I thought you wrote somewhere that you’d have to modify the countdown numbers to correspond to this new thing, I thought you said something about going with 6 as the highest instead of 8? Sorry if I got that wrong.)
Because drawing a 10 segment clock is annoying. 4/6/8 is better.
Wait, wait, I have to do annoying, useless math or sheet-checking every time I make an action roll just because a guy famous for his graphic design skills won’t solve a graphic design problem?
Also, your comment about drawing two pentagrams being annoying has been reported to the heavy metal police and they will be along shortly to rescind your membership.
With three friends (Antoine Pempie, Gherhartd Sildoenfein and Luke Wayland), we had a session last night (France). 3mn after we began, we sawed your post about new effect system. We read it and thought : “well, it sounds good, let’s playing this way tonight !”.
(Of course, we didn’t had the time to convert the effects on character sheets, but that was not a big deal)
This rule is actually great. Rolls were proceeded much faster but the “pool rule” kept the randomness which is pretty cool. In our first session, it was the mechanics were a bit heavy (well, we had to figure it out) and in this session, it was more fluid, quicker, and in that way, pretty cool.
We played with the switch option, which is great, imo, though we didn’t used it very often).
For critical rolls, I houseruled it in a very simple way : when you roll two 6, you can choose to use them for a critical and the take a third die for the effect (or none for a 1 effect) or you can choose to use the second 6 for the effect. This is simple but I think it works (not sure it happend yesterday).
Concerning the “balance”, I think the new effect system makes the roll to be more simplier if you are skilled but more difficult if you’re not (so no big deal I think). I’m more concerned about long term project since you will always try to make a project you’ll be able to handle (so, in chich you are skilled). So, I think you can easily fullfill the clock in a roll, two at most.. and I think this is pretty easy and quick for a “long term” project.
But, I think this rule goes in a great direction. Though, we had a really good time yesterday, playing your game.
Thx John !!!
Edit : and apologies if my english sounds a bit weird…
What do you think of keeping the same characteristics blade/book/coat/mask (for force/insight/maneuver/control)?
Just chiming in to say condensing Action/Effect into a single roll is definitely a great idea. I’d definitely like the option to choose which of the two is Action or Effect, though – if not as standard, then maybe as something enabled by gear or advancements.
Maybe its been an “April fool” thing?
So with that rule no more point to spend in character creation into the effect rating ? You take a fixed starting stats ? And does the effect still gain experience points ?
I like anything that involves fewer die rolls, so I’m intrigued for how this will turn out.
I’ve always liked Presence as a name for willpower / influence / charisma, if you’re looking for suggestions.
For my part, I prefer the QS effect rules. This alternate system seems to require applying more modifiers to effect levels, and my worry is that it’s fussier. Does it actually save time?
Damien Rahyll Thanks for playtesting! That’s really good to hear.
Johnstone Metzger Yeah, yeah… okay. You’re right! I’ll drop the stupid modifier chart thing.
Mathieu Mazzoni Effects will still advance with XP, probably as a playbook advance option. For starting diamonds… we’ll see. They might be fixed, or you might get to place one or two. Depends on how it shakes out through playtesting.
What would happen if you rolled one Action die and used an Effect with one diamond, making it so that the 1 Effect result is reduced to 0? Would that just depend on the result of the Action roll?
I like the condensed dice pool and condensed list of effects, but it does feel fussier.
I’m gonna drop that modifier step, as I said in my reply to Johnstone. So less fussy, hopefully.
Some thoughts:
1) Without the modifier, a great effect roll of 6 plus a maxed out rating of 4, plus a fine item, and perhaps a set up and an increased effect from a crit, you could achieve 11–14 segments in a single roll. Is that desirable for a late-game crit?
2) Perhaps Teamwork-Set up grants bonus dice to an ally’s action roll rather than effect (which consequently also helps get a higher effect die).
If that’s the case, there may not even need to be an option for Backup-Assist by spending one stress. That may encourage more backup players to instead take dangers for each other. That also seems fine to me since Backup players can already ‘assist’ if the leader uses the Lead the group Point action that allows everyone to roll.
3) The minimum of 1 diamond in a rating seems less necessary now that the second d6 will always be at least 1.
4) I would think increasing an effect rating could cost at least 2 playbook advances, since they seem very valuable now.
Yep, Adam, I agree with you on all that. I’ll think more about 2) and how teamwork integrates. “Assist for stress” is a nice simple thing, so I’ll see if I can keep it.
True, Assist (bonus dice) for stress seems more elegant than Set Up especially if action and effect are both benefited by lending bonus dice to the action roll.
Maybe the Point moves only need to be “Lead the Team” or “Overcome on your own”? Those are nicely symmetrical.
It is nice (though occasionally confusing for pacing) to have something to do on Point when you feel ill-equipped to the problem at hand. Then again, that may just be a matter of not going on Point when you’re ill-equipped to do anything.
I really like having a Point option for when you’re ill equipped. We had an epic “I’ll set you up with a distraction by dueling the Red Sash’s best sword-master” the other night. 🙂
So I’ll figure something out.
I trust you will. 🙂
Could be:
Backup = +1d to Point’s roll, at the cost of 1 stress
Set Up = +d per your relevant Action rating to the next Point action, at the cost of facing a danger (no action roll, but may roll to resist if desired).
This would make Set Up like a proactive equivalent to the reactive Backup action: Face an Effect.
It would also be basically lumping two PCs action ratings into a synergistic one at the cost of facing danger.
Because I just can’t quit while I’m ahead, can we talk about these pizza pie things you seem addicted to drawing? Are these important to the setting in any way? Or are they just artifacts of the culture of players that have nothing to do with the fictional setting presented by the game? Because I get really annoyed at that stuff.
Are they supposed to be clocks, like in AW? If they are clocks, they should go up to 12, which might work quite well, given what Adam pointed out above (maybe not so much for beginning characters, but definitely for later-stage opposition). Also, clocks seem like they could be a pretty important thing in this setting, what with the sun almost gone out and all. People need clocks to tell them when to sleep and get up, or they start to get insomnia and go crazy, like people do in the arctic. And you’d need to defend those clocks from ghosts, because ghosts will mess with them and screw up the timing on electric lights so they can sneak around or drive people insane and steal their bodies or whatever other evil stuff they get up to, right?
Clocks are important in Duskwall, yep. And in the game, too.
I don’t feel any special need to justify them further. 🙂
Do you think this suggested method (2nd die result = effect) still worth consideration/testing after the great QSv2 changes?
I’m still thinking about it, but I’m not completely sold. It deprecates the importance of Effect ratings in a way that I don’t really like.
I do like using the second die quite a bit, though. So… I’m still pondering.
In spite of Johnstone’s concerns, does having a mod array of -1 to +2 (or -2 to +2) with current clock sizes restore their efficacy somewhat or does the problem exist regardless when using the second highest die?
Cool.
Perhaps Effect ratings would carry more weight if Risky/Controlled Crits add the Effect rating a second time? This makes higher ratings much more effective, but perhaps too effective?
I realize crits need more tweaking possible since, at low effect ratings (0 or 1), the second 6 may often equate to a greater effect than a third die plus 2xeffect. This could be a perk however, highlighting the difference of crits as a stroke of luck for the untrained and a stroke of intentional awesome for the specialist.
Another factor of this would be that players who get a rare super crit (triple 6s) could produce spectacularly impressive results (6+2×3 or 4 would be 12 or 14. Too high even for a rare case in late game? While it may seem exorbitantly high, most clocks won’t be that big anyway, so in practice it would mean “impressively complete whatever you’re attempting” which I find valid).
By “deprecates” do you mean the die result ends up having more effect than the effect stat?
Yep.
Could flip and use the result of the 2nd die to modify the PC’s effect rating:
1-3 = Effect rating (minimum 1) segments
4,5 = Effect rating + 2 segments
6 = Effect rating + 4 segments
This could work well if players are allowed to choose which is the action die and which is the effect.
Similarly, could instead do half the 2nd highest die, rounding down. Then you could keep smaller clocks, but you have less variation.
I think 0, 1, 2, and 4 on a crit, plus the effect stat, are probably closer to the current numbers. Just think of rolling three 6s on a desperate roll. Do you crit the action, or the effect? That’s the devil for ya.
Getting in late, but I really prefer the separate Effect rolls as originally laid out.
To me, Effect roll only is a much more intuitive way to handle situations like “do I get the lock open before the guard comes back?” than Action rolls. “Okay, it’s a 6 segment lock, so not super complicated, and you’re good enough not to make newbie mistakes. You’ve got time for… let’s say 3 rolls before the patrol turns back this way.”
I also see the usefulness of separating Action and Effect in encouraging players toward bolder, more specific actions. “If you just say “I stab him with my sword” then you’ll need to roll twice… but if you go straight for his throat, the danger will be greater, but if you succeed he’s dead, no need to roll effect.”
Actually, y’know, I think the one-roll system where you use the 2nd die for effect would probably benefit from just ditching the effect stats altogether (and using the same set of stats for action and effect/resistance). By that point it’s almost a different game though.
The normal rules really benefits from the whole group being on the same page about what sort of actions require an effect roll and which don’t, I think. I know there was at least one point in the playtest video where I was really turned off by the additional effect roll after the action roll and thought it just slowed things down, or was like an extra chance to fail. But then, I also know people who would be totally fine doing that for just about every roll. And everybody in that playtest video seemed on the same page, too, so…
I’m still a fan of this system. Rolling once instead of twice is aesthetically pleasing to me as well as faster. I also think we’re all competent enough with basic arithmetic that we can add or subtract an integer.