A Dicey Dilemma

[torilen]

I will agree that the various dice have different and/or better distribution of rolls. d12 vs 2d6,
d100 for percentages, etc. And yes, the various dice are more fun.

Just my experience, however, it is hard to find just a single d12. Normally, you have to buy those
in sets - d4, d6, d10, d12, d20 - or else you can find the single die, but it is overprices, being that
it is just by itself.

I find it much easier to get a hold of d6's, and I find that commonness very nice and make those
dice much more useful. You can find them anywhere. If you don't want to buy new dice, you can
just pull them out of an old board game.

I also think it makes it easier for outsiders to get into a game that uses a d6. HQ, for example...
if someone puts out their own version of HQ, with all the rules and a quest pack or two...but it is
just the rules and quest books, someone might be scared off by having to find miniatures AND
a new set of dice.

You know...make things as easy as possible for newcomers.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I've finished the combat test now and have updated the link http://smokinggnu.net/downloads/Combat_Test.docx with the complete file, and here are the results and conclusion;

Results

Each of the characters took place in twelve fights. The Warrior won the most fights with eight ending in victory, the Warrior Champion, despite having slightly higher statistics, came in second with seven victories, the Barbarian was just behind with six, then the Tank with five and finally the Thug, perhaps as expected, came in last with only four victories.

Forty-one rounds were fought across the 30 battles so each battle lasted on average just under 1.5 rounds, so fast and deadly. Only three of the battles lasted three rounds with most lasting only a single round.

There were nine draws in the forty one rounds, so around one draw in every five rounds or three battles which seems reasonable.

Conclusion

The close combat value seems to be the biggest influence on the outcome, as you might expect, the results are in line with this figure with the exception of the top two being reversed, so there is no substitute for experience, skill up and take a shield or buckler.

Whilst armour has an impact on the outcome of a fight (two otherwise equal opponents, the one with the better armour would win statistically), it plays less of a part than close combat score and damage, however don't ignore the effect that armour has of reducing the damage suffered, you may lose the fight, but live for another day (not covered during this demo).

Damage had less of an outcome than you might imagine, due to critical hits producing a greater effect, so heavy weapons may prove less popular although they may still prove useful against low skilled, high armoured targets like Trolls or indeed doors and furniture.

In terms of the feel and balance of the system, personally I like it, but you'd have to try it to see how it feels!

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I'm not sure what your vision of this project is, but the combat seems nothing like either HQ or AHQ. No offense intended though, it is quite elegant. I think it is a very nice combat system for a rules-light skirmish game, and you are on to something with the stun, attack again to kill mechanism... It is kind of like the critical hit system in AHQ (bonus attack), but less random and made into an integral part of combat.

If you are trying to capture the best of both HQ and AHQ you should probably use the combat system from either one or the other, and neither combat system uses 2d6. Perhaps if you elaborate more on your project I could offer more solid advise.

I played various games with a group of friends from 1990 to 1995, HeroQuest was one of the initial and most popular ones then later we also embraced AHQ and played the two in parallel for a while. We did buy Warhammer Quest just before we all went our separate ways but only played a handful of games. Now 20 years later I'm looking to introduce a younger batch to the world of the Dungeon Crawler.

Initially i joined this site as I wanted to ascertain the most obvious flaws in HQ and discuss, then implement some tidy fixes before presenting the game to the new batch (see Established House Rules), however in the discussions since joining the project has expanded somewhat! Basically I am now looking to use AHQ tiles and other similar minis, but with rules that have the simple grace of HQ. The 2D6 mechanism detailed above (it doesn't only cover combat, that was just a demonstration) is my way of capturing the essential simplicity of HQ but in a way that makes introducing new stuff, creatures, characters, equipment, artifacts and an advancement system easier to implement! Once I've drawn these rules up as a draft I'm going to convert the first set of HQ Quests...

[torilen]

Bareheaded Warrior: Basically I am now looking to use AHQ tiles and other similar minis, but with rules that have the simple grace of HQ.

HA HA HA - We won over another. All will eventually bow to the sweet, majestic simplicity that is HQ.

[Daedalus]

Maybe you should test run the d12 option as well to see how the characters fair. To be safe statistically, you'll need to run more than three battles each. 200 is considered safe, but without a computer you wouldn't want to attempt that! Since the combats are so fast, maybe 20 contests for each pair will give you a fair idea.

After reading your principles of design I thought maybe a simple d6 could work. Level-ups tend to be more limited in boardgames, and simple dungeon crawlers don't need a large range of outcomes to run. A +1 modifier applied to a d6 range has impact, so skill will count. If you limit CC, damage, and armor bonuses to 5, then a +0CC, +0 damage flunky has a slim chance to score a hit against an elite +5CC, +5 armor tank 1 in 36 times. Same odds work with armor and damage. It's highly unlikely anything more than a stun results, but the next round the flunky is +3 and an underdog win is looking more possible.

If you want to expand the bonus range up to 11, then have a roll of 6 grant a bonus die. Subtract 1 and add it to the roll, which will create a range from 1 to 11.

Your first criteria of a sliver of a chance can work with a d6, as detailed above. Your second criteria is fairly accomplished with a d6 as well. Half of the contests will fall within +2. Your third criteria may be considered met if you feel a 1 in 6 chance of a draw is acceptable. I'd say the speed of your system can handle this. Your fourth criteria is met, as a linear d6 is about as simple as it gets. Your system adds the elegance.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

Thanks for the insightful feedback Daedalus. The system I used started as a simple D6 and I guess it shows but I found it was a little too random, too many 1s and 6s which meant skills and similar took second place to luck! I did consider a computer simulation or manually doing a dozen of each, but then decided I might aswell go with 2D6 and playtest rather than test as it is more fun.

I am currently converting the original quest pack to my new system, once done I will do a round of playtesting then tweak the quests, rules and review the system then publish th e update version on my website (and put a link here of course)

[Big Bene]

I found it was a little too random, too many 1s and 6s which meant skills and similar took second place to luck!

Two possibilities to solve this, just out of my head, not really thought through:
1: decrease the effects of the lucky strikes and fumbles. A lucky strike (roll of 6) should be really better than a normal one, but not make up the outcome of the fight by its own.
2: When you roll a 6, this is just a 6 - a very good roll, giving a good chance to win the contest, but nothing more. However, it allows you to roll another D6, and when this is also 6, you have placed a lucky strike. Chance is 1/36, just as rolling a 12 with 2D6.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I doubt anyone is still interested but I just found this old post and thought I'd better update the thread with how the game system turned out.

In the end I went for the D6 and the 'critical success' only occurred when you beat your opponent score by five pips i.e. they rolled 1 and you rolled 6 - a 1 in 36 chance. In addition to reduce the randomness we doubled up the skills bonuses, so instead of getting +1/2/3 at the three skills levels you get +2/4/6 and that system finally meant that I could unite my fantasy AHQ variant and my old 'BlockWar' game circa 1988 which was a futuristic skirmish game (that was later merged with Confrontation from GW the forerunner to Necromunda for those old enough to remember).

[Anderas]

I think the d6 are the better variant as extreme results are possible, but rarer than with a d12. You have a rare event resolution of less than three percent, while at the same time for the standard game you stay reliably around 4-10 so your talent value keeps his high influence in most cases.

If you want to have the same rare event resolution then you normally need a d20 or even a d100. But no one wants to put up with high numbers, so this really is a good solution.

I think only the gamezones die is solving this equally good, with 6 sides that have 15% each, and two sides that have 5% each. The only failure of this die is that no one owns one.

[Daedalus]

It's good to hear you found your solution and a d6 was a part of it. Even if it was just a temporary experiment, you achieved what you set out to do and learned a lot from the experience. Do you think you will ever pay this system again, seeing how it hit a sweet spot?