forse ho trovato una soluzione, riporto quanto scritto sul forum di Ron:
I
may have found a solution!
The idea is to use
a single set of poly-dice instead of thousands of d6.
It would work like this:
All relevant elements all end up translated as either Danger/Action/Expert dice.
So, instead of rolling a die for each element, I'll add up all elements to BUILD the dice to be rolled.
Es..
if I have to factor in 6 Danger elements, I will roll 1d6 Danger
if I have to factor in 10 Danger elements, I will roll 1d10 Danger
Dice are built using the biggest die possible.
So if I have to factor 12 Danger elements I won't roll 2d6 but just 1d12.
Dice will be as follow:
d1 (a special way to read a d4)
d2 (any die read as Even=HIT and Odd=FAIL)
d3 (a special way to read a d6)
d4
d6
d8
d10
d12
d20
Danger and Expert dice are read not as a result, but as a
quantity.
In this way the bigger amount is always made of FAIL (for Danger) or of HIT (for Expert), and the rest is made up of the other result.
This also takes into account that ALL such results will be "critical" thus scoring Influence and Opposition along the normal HITs and FAILs.
Es.. rolling 1d6 Danger I score a "2" this means 2-out-of-6, so a quantity of 2 and a quantity of 4 ... being a Danger die it reads as 4 FAILs and 2 HITs.
score 1 = 5 FAILs and 1 HIT
score 2 = 4 FAILs and 2 HITs
score 3 = 3 FAILs and 3 HITs
score 4 = 4 FAILs and 2 HITs
score 5 = 5 FAILs and 1 HITs
score 6 = 6 FAILs and 0 HITs
On the other hand the Action die reads as a normal score of successes, so a roll of "2" means 2 HITs and that's it.
This represents the fact that Action dice are not automatically critical, so normal FAILs just don't matter.
In this way the whole system can run on the roll of 3 (or very little more) dice.
I intend to also implement the use of a play-mat to roll dice on, so that the actual dice color becomes irrelevant (Danger are not the "black" dice, but the dice rolled on the Danger-Area of the play-mat).
Also, in this way the results of any one roll are much more clear-cut and easy to keep in mind or write down... so if I need to roll 1d8 Danger and 1d8 Action I can roll my one d8 for Danger, note the result, and re-roll the same die for Action.
In this way a single set of dice of any colour is enough for the whole table.
.
.
.
Right now the only problem I can see is represented by the chance of critical results in Action elements.
Using this one-die system I end up with an Action roll that only tells me about HITs and FAILs... not about Influence and Opposition
One solution could be to roll the Action die... and then (after HIT/FAIL assesment) read it as the base element for a new roll that only determines the amount of Influence/Opposition generated.
Es..
I need to factor 11 Action... it turns into 1d10+1d1... which produces 6 HITs and 5 FAILs.
So I roll 1d6 for the HITs scoring a 2: I have 2 Infleunce.
Then I roll 1d4+1d1 for the FAILs scoring a 3: I have 3 Opposition.
Maybe I could account for the fact that Action dice have a lesser % of scoring criticals, and also simplify the die rolls, by scaling the dice to the nearest
whole level.
So 1d6 becomes 1d4.
And 1d4+1d1 becomes 1d3 (just remove any +something and scale down 1 step)
This way the "crit-roll" is simpler and cleaner.
.
.
.
Extended Example
The Obstacle is a monster and I, as a shiny paladin, have to plow its ass.
I describe my heroic action and then start gathering my pool.
MODE = 3 Action
Skill = 4 Action
Tools = 6 Action and 4 Danger (between my sword, armor and the amulet of my god, which I somehow put to good use here)
Perks = 2 Expert
Details = 3 Danger
I end up with 13 Action, 7 Danger and 2 Expert.
This translates to:
d10+d3 Action
d6+d1 Danger
d2 Expert
I roll'em:
Action scores 9 HITs (6 from the d10 + 3 from the d3) which also means 4 FAILs
So I roll 1d6 for Crit-HITs (9 HITs = d8+d1 = d8 = d6) and 1d3 for Crit-FAILs (4 FAILs = d4 = d3) ... scoring 2 Influence and 2 Opposition
Danger scores 2 HITs and 5 FAILs (all critical)
Expert scores 2 HITs (all critical)
My total result is 13 HITs and 9 FAILs with 6 Influence and 7 Opposition.
...
..
.
It sound much more complicated and laborious than it actually is.
But I'll test it thouroughly this evening and then this sunday morning and evening.
I'll keep you posted
