Anyone else feel spark dice system gets boring pretty fast?

[Blizz]

I think the dice system needs to be reworked if its to compete against games such as D&D. There's something special about that 1-20 roll + your modifiers that make it so engaging that I just really don't feel when rolling dice for sparks. I get this is supposed to be casualized to make it easier to pick up but it feels like it lacks a lot of weight or risk to it. I would have really liked to see something innovative to D&D's dice like L5R's exploding dice system than something purely lighter.

[Joey [Riftweaver]]

Originally posted by Blizz:

I think the dice system needs to be reworked if its to compete against games such as D&D. There's something special about that 1-20 roll + your modifiers that make it so engaging that I just really don't feel when rolling dice for sparks. I get this is supposed to be casualized to make it easier to pick up but it feels like it lacks a lot of weight or risk to it. I would have really liked to see something innovative to D&D's dice like L5R's exploding dice system than something purely lighter.

While we likely won't have a d20 anytime soon, we do have a fairly strong system rework planned on the roadmap. We'll be detailing that soon.

We don't want to overcomplicate dice, and that's a delicate balance. Some players want more complication, some want less. We're working through Early Access to make it right.

Thank you for this feedback!

[Lee]

Spark feels like a bit of an odd variant on Fudge dice. Let's say you have some skill at 3 in each system.

Anydice Simulation of Spark and Fudge[anydice.com]

If you can't use the link, and aren't familiar with Fudge, the most probable outcome of a roll is your skill level 3 (~23%), and it's a bell curve distribution around it.

With Spark, you're actually much more likely to roll lower than your skill, a 1 and 2 each have a 19% outcome and a 3 is only 16%.


Actually this creates a bit of an odd situation as you increase in skill. At skill 1 in Spark, you have a 50% of rolling a 1 or higher. At skill 2, you have a 62.5% chance of rolling 1 or higher. At skill 3 you have a 68.75% chance of rolling a 1 or higher. So for just succeeding at baseline tasks you aren't getting a linear increase in chance, however you are unlocking the ability to roll higher (and oddly, lower).


Anyway, interesting system, but it really isn't as intuitive as Fudge.

[SZ]

Originally posted by Blizz:

I think the dice system needs to be reworked if its to compete against games such as D&D. There's something special about that 1-20 roll + your modifiers that make it so engaging that I just really don't feel when rolling dice for sparks. I get this is supposed to be casualized to make it easier to pick up but it feels like it lacks a lot of weight or risk to it. I would have really liked to see something innovative to D&D's dice like L5R's exploding dice system than something purely lighter.

I actually HATE the d20 system. I prefer the much simpler pass/fail based approach. I am a big fan of the genesys system. That said, I think it's very important to keep an RPG as rules light as possible, the more rules and options you have the more restrictive that system becomes.

You can get a good explanation of why this is by watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4CtmBKWSyQ

[Murray McBrain]

To me it's not just the dice, it's the whole rules system in general. There's little to no room for character customisation. Like I can't just make a character who uses lightning magic, or one that's tailored to my character's backstory. For the sake of comparison, look at the character creation in Pathfinder 2e, which is amazing.

[Blizz]

Originally posted by Slaad:

Originally posted by Blizz:

I think the dice system needs to be reworked if its to compete against games such as D&D. There's something special about that 1-20 roll + your modifiers that make it so engaging that I just really don't feel when rolling dice for sparks. I get this is supposed to be casualized to make it easier to pick up but it feels like it lacks a lot of weight or risk to it. I would have really liked to see something innovative to D&D's dice like L5R's exploding dice system than something purely lighter.

I actually HATE the d20 system. I prefer the much simpler pass/fail based approach. I am a big fan of the genesys system. That said, I think it's very important to keep an RPG as rules light as possible, the more rules and options you have the more restrictive that system becomes.

You can get a good explanation of why this is by watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4CtmBKWSyQ

Interesting, I highly agree wit him on in person rpgs, but I don't see how you could really set up this system digitally so rule-less

[Lee]

I feel like one of the biggest strengths of VTTs is that they can make crunchy systems work so much faster. I can run a White Wolf RPG combat in a VTT like Fantasy Grounds in 20 minutes instead of 3 hours. My players don't have to count out giant dice pools and count successes according to ever varying rules, tracking hitpoints, status effects, and timings can all be automated.

If I want to play something like Amber or Fiasco do I even need a VTT? If we really need to, something like Tabletop Simulator that gives you a much more physical feeling is better. So for something like Fablecraft it can be nice to have a bit more crunch to it. The way combat works in it is already sort of that -- it has some complicated components that are all streamlined by the game engine.

[SZ]

Originally posted by Blizz:

Originally posted by Slaad:

I actually HATE the d20 system. I prefer the much simpler pass/fail based approach. I am a big fan of the genesys system. That said, I think it's very important to keep an RPG as rules light as possible, the more rules and options you have the more restrictive that system becomes.

You can get a good explanation of why this is by watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4CtmBKWSyQ

Interesting, I highly agree wit him on in person rpgs, but I don't see how you could really set up this system digitally so rule-less

It's easy. The game expects there to be a GM, that means the GM can decide what to roll and what you need to succeed and what happens when you succeed/fail. If this "VTT" isn't capable of that, then it's not really a VTT, it's more like a board game.

You don't need a rule book to tell you what is possible, the more rules a system gives you, the less capable your characters are. Anytime a rule is "defined" it creates more restrictions in how things can be accomplished.

[Blizz]

Originally posted by Slaad:

Originally posted by Blizz:

Interesting, I highly agree wit him on in person rpgs, but I don't see how you could really set up this system digitally so rule-less

It's easy. The game expects there to be a GM, that means the GM can decide what to roll and what you need to succeed and what happens when you succeed/fail. If this "VTT" isn't capable of that, then it's not really a VTT, it's more like a board game.

You don't need a rule book to tell you what is possible, the more rules a system gives you, the less capable your characters are. Anytime a rule is "defined" it creates more restrictions in how things can be accomplished.

But how would that even work in practice for newer GMs, something that this game will certainly attract as opposed to the experienced GMs already sunk cost in the RPGs they know. A new GM will have a much harder time without guided and bound rules to know what to do next or how to react to a scenario that is entirely free form. I do think Lee above brought up a good point about the balance of a VTT vs a boardgame simulator like TTS, at what point do you even need a VTT if you are going for 0 rules?

[Devil May Spy]

Originally posted by Blizz:

Originally posted by Slaad:

It's easy. The game expects there to be a GM, that means the GM can decide what to roll and what you need to succeed and what happens when you succeed/fail. If this "VTT" isn't capable of that, then it's not really a VTT, it's more like a board game.

You don't need a rule book to tell you what is possible, the more rules a system gives you, the less capable your characters are. Anytime a rule is "defined" it creates more restrictions in how things can be accomplished.

But how would that even work in practice for newer GMs, something that this game will certainly attract as opposed to the experienced GMs already sunk cost in the RPGs they know. A new GM will have a much harder time without guided and bound rules to know what to do next or how to react to a scenario that is entirely free form. I do think Lee above brought up a good point about the balance of a VTT vs a boardgame simulator like TTS, at what point do you even need a VTT if you are going for 0 rules?

On the other hand, at what point can even still call it a TTRPG if you're basically just playing a multiplayer tactical RPG in video game format? When I play a TTRPG, I want to be roleplaying my character, with rules vague enough to actually allow me to do whatever I want or make whatever kind of character I want, that fits with the style and setting of the campaign at least. I like a good balance of rules and freedom, personally.