Showing posts with label probability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label probability. Show all posts

Friday, January 31, 2014

WotA, Fate, and Step Dice

I've posted about alternatives to Fate dice before, and it's an idea I keep coming back to as I work on Wrath of the Autarch. Mainly this comes in the form of varying a single dice by steps (d4, d6, d8, d10, etc) and then subtracting d6 from it. The baseline roll of d6 - d6 is a slightly more chaotic approximation to 4dF.

One of the motivations comes from compels. Traditional Fate compels aren't a good fit for the game. Their function is typically to introduce narrative complications into a character's life. They propel the story forward and add new wrinkles.
Will a d14 be needed?

But Wrath already has a mechanism for that. In the narrative phase, players can get narrative control and introduce all manner of complications. If they use an aspect as the basis for that narration, they get a Fate point. They have motivations for adding those sorts of complications.

So far, though, in playtesting, that doesn't generate quite a big enough stream of Fate points to the players. Using step dice presents another, more mechanical, option.

I've been playing with the idea of invoking aspects to step up the first dice, and compelling them to step down the first die. Once the first die is chosen, it's locked into place. After the roll, Fate points may only be spent on re-rolls. This opens up the option of players using aspects negatively against themselves, and just stepping down the first die roll.

This is less valuable than a normal use of an aspect, since it's only an expected value of +1, rather than a guaranteed +2. But it's also a little easier to keep the Fate points flowing, so maybe it will offset.

Also, this opens up some options for sources of increasing die steps:

Developments

It makes sense for different development types, such as Improved Casting, Advanced Armors, Thieves Tools, etc, to grant bonuses to the first die on any applicable rolls.

I would like it if at least some development provides bonuses for each mini-game (Infiltration, Skirmish, Diplomacy, and Warfare). Currently it's pretty random, with some mini-games like Diplomacy not having any such developments.

I'll have to think about that. I do have some developments that I'm not so keen on, and could probably swap out for a different effect.

Stunts

Stunts could also be used for bumping up dice rolls in a similar fashion. It will be tricky, though, to not overlap what developments are doing too much. Developments are more significant, since they apply to every character.

Using step dice also opens the door to stunts like this:

Wild Attack - Step up both the positive dice and the negative dice by one when using Fighting to attack.

So, a character could roll d8 - d8 to attack, increasing the range of the results.

Relationships

Currently characters have bonds with other characters that are just modeled as aspects. I reset all of these with one free invoke to encourage their use.

Another option would be to allow one step up/down on any applicable roll. This would make relationships really desirable, and make for some conscious choices on how characters interact.

Even more so if there are limited relationship slots. Because this is a troupe style game, this would make for some interesting choices when picking characters to take on a mission.

Stronghold Oath

Finally, there might be room for some sort of interaction with the Stronghold. After all, the Stronghold has aspects, and it's assumed that each character feels some way towards them.

So, in a similar style to relationships, having the option to step up/down the dice based on a particular Stronghold aspect might be interesting.

Baseline d4 - d6

If there are *too* many ways to step up dice without spending Fate points, it may be necessary for the baseline roll to be d4 - d6, just because the first dice will frequently get bumped up higher than that.

Rerolls

One thing that stepping up the first dice does is increase the value of re-rolls. As the range of results widens, they become more and more valuable.

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Fortex+ (Looking Deeper into Alternative Fate Dice Distributions)

After hearing some gripes from players in my WotA group about Fate dice, I've been interested in exploring the pros and cons of various alternatives.  I'm particularly interested in the following features:
  • No re-rolls.  This is in an attempt to place all the tension at the moment of the roll itself, rather than a negotiation afterward.  I'm also not a huge fan of the re-roll option in Fate - it's sort of another hoop to jump through.
  • Player driven compels.  One thing I like about Cortex+ is the simplicity of player driven compels, where there is a mechanism for players to generate their own currency (fate points, plot points, etc).  I'm not against GM-driven compels, but I *really* like a mechanism for players to bring in currency without the GM's guidance.  The way I handled that in WotA was just to let players take a Fate point anytime they could narrate how an aspect they had caused problems on a failed roll.
Anyway, I was interested in exploring the d6 - d6 distribution for Fate, and then extending that to rolling a set of dice, taking the highest rolled, along with rolling a set of dice, and subtracting the lowest rolled.
  • Start with d6 - d6.
  • Spend a Fate point to:
    • Step up a die in the first pool, or add a new d6 to the pool.  For instance, with two fate points, you could roll d10 - d6 (incrementing d6 to d8, then to d10).  Or you could roll 3d6 (taking the highest) - d6.
    • Add a d6 to the second pool, taking the lowest of the results.  So, with two fate points, you could roll 2d6 (taking the highest) - 2d6 (taking the lowest).
  • Rolling d4 - d6 counts as a compel, granting a Fate point.  Of course, an aspect is needed for this, and it must make narrative sense.
This system does fulfill the no re-rolls and player driven compels features.  However, it also compromises much of the player agency that Fate provides.  Anyway, it was interesting to explore the probabilities of such a system.

The first metric to look at is expected value.  For expected value, the best way to use Fate points is just to bump the first dice up.  Adding extra dice doesn't help expected value as much.  In the last entries below, the parentheses indicate rolling a set of dice and taking the highest (if before the subtraction) or the lowest (if after).  As can be seen from expected values, a Fate point in this system is worth much less than in regular Fate (it's roughly +1 instead of +2).
  • d6 - d6 : 0
  • d8 - d6: +1
  • d10 - d6: +2
  • d12 - d6: +3.0
  • d12 - (d6, d6): +3.97
  • (d6, d12) - (d6, d6): +4.46
That said, expected value is only one way to look at probability.  It doesn't take into account the distribution of results.  For that, rolling a set of dice and taking the highest naturally makes the lowest results even less likely, while simultaneously making the highest results less likely (or impossible).  For instance, the graph at right shows cumulative probability density functions for when three Fate points are available.  In that case, the first dice can be bumped up three times from a d6 to a d12, or two extra dice could be added to the first pool (taking the highest) and one to the last pool (taking the lowest).  Thus, if you really need to get above a two, more than you care about rolling really high, it's better to go the pool route.  Because rolling a -5, -4, or -3 is very unlikely.

So, there are some real trade-offs in this approach, and risk can be involved.  Interestingly, if the pools are removed and traditional Fate re-rolls are used with the stepped up dice (d8 - d6, etc), it's worth a re-roll if the expected value or less is rolled.  So, if a +2 is rolled on d10 - d6, it merits a re-roll.  This is another possibility that could be interesting: allow re-rolls, but the first dice must be stepped up and locked down before any re-rolls take place.

Anyway, after thinking about how this might work in WotA, I think I'm going to stick with the standard Fate model.  However, I am considering using d6 - d6 for Fate rolls and allowing certain Stronghold developments to bump up the first dice.  There's something very visceral about rolling d12 - d6 and nailing a +11.  But I would keep Fate points the same (add +2 or allow a re-roll).