From: wildstar@moeng2.minc.umd.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Dice rolling
Date: 23 Jul 92 15:19:01 GMT
Organization: Morgan State U. / Sch. of Engineering, Baltimore, MD

As a player, I don't mind a reasonable amount of dice rolling.  When I
playwargames, they are usually tactical-level games (I particularly like
Ironclads, Harpoon, Air Superiority, Panzer, and MBT).  For me,
"reasonable" dice rolling might include:
	o A roll "to hit" by the attacker
	o A defense roll by the defender
	o A "hit location" or "effect" roll
	o A "damage" or "severity" roll
	o A "critical" roll of some kind.

Note that on the average, not all of these rolls are called for all of
the time.  Critical rolls should occur in only a minority of the cases;
defence rolls are only called for if the "to hit" roll is made; Hit
location and Damage are only called for if the defense roll fails.

The number and sides of the dice are not really important (although more
than about 3 dice are difficult to quickly add up in my head).  I
personally think that it is important to be consistent.  In other words,
I don't like games that want all kinds of different dice; I don't really
care if the game uses d6, d10, d100, d8, d12, or d30 as long as it uses
one (or at most two) kinds and just those kinds (I do like d10/d100
combinations, though).  Similarly, the number to roll should be
relatively consistent; exceptions should be well marked and easily
distinguishable.

I am also quite flexable on table driven versus non-table-driven game
systems, and on the types of table-driven systems in use.  Again the
main point is that the method used should not be a distraction to use.
To me, this means that all of the necessasary tables, charts, or
whatever should fit on a reference card of some manageable size, and
enough cards should be included so that each player can have one.
Finding enough room on the card to include a turn sequence and combat
flowchart is good, too.

The main reason for these preferences is to keep the game moving.  We
don't play these games for the fun of rolling dice and looking up
tables.  The game mechanics should be subordinate to the situation being
simulated and the decisions the players must make.  If there is too mich
dice-rolling and table-flipping, the game will drag and seem boring or
tedious, no matter how accurate your results are.  Games that keep the
players actively involved will seem exciting and interesting, and there
will be more of the feeling that each player's decisions are responsible
for victory (or defeat), rather than being decided by the dice and the
rules.  The above comments apply equally well to wargames, simulations,
and role-playing games.

So, for example, I don't want to have to go flipping through the
rulebook to find the combat results table, then have to find the right
number of the right kind of dice from the dozen that are on the table,
roll them, and then have to repeat the process many more times (with a
different number of different dice) on another table (on a different
page of the rulebook).  Ugh.  Games like this don't get played.

What I do want to be able to do is proceed down the reference card in a
logical manner, scooping up the dice from the table and rolling them,
until the combat is done.

-- 

wildstar@moeng2.minc.umd.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future