The weaknesses of D6

[Grimace]

This is sort of a correlative thread based on the "Strengths of D6" idea. What do people think are the weaknesses of the D6 system? What doesn't it do well, and why do you feel that way?

[skeloric]

"Fistful of dice"
The books in the past have covered this to many people's satisfaction but every once in awhile, it comes up again.

[imported_Magman]

Do you think some people might enjoy rolling that many dice? I am being serious. I can see people getting this high as the sound of a dozen or so dice are rolling across the table and all these 6's are shining upwards. It's like an ego boost for them.

But then the problem is spending the time counting all those dice...

[skeloric]

To be honest, I've been known to get a thrill at rolling a mass of D10s in White Wolf to count the successes and I think that the D6 rolling is similar enough in scope.

But there are these OTHER people...

[Kalzazz]

One of the first things I did upon starting to play D6 Fantasy was buy a cube of 36 D6 . . . one of the things I did shortly after was work on devising a spell where I could roll 37d6 (said cube of dice plus my mighty Strawberry Wild Die)

I consider fistfuls of dice a good thing, provided it doesnt get to excessive, to excessive is generally measured by 'you cant fit all the dice in both your hands'

Now, if it was a situation where I had to roll oodles of dice lots of times (say as a DM), I might get upset. But generally oodles of dice are rare occurences associated with say boss monsters

[hellsreach]

The die simplification chart is your friend.

That said, I love rolling tons of dice, especially if it a result of spending fate/Force points, character points ands such on something suitably dramatic. It sets my heart aglow (now where is my Tums).

[Lee Torres]

Long ago, over on RPG.net, a poster (I believe it was Grubman) put forward the thought that one of the things he loved about D6 was the moments when a huge dicepool hits the table and goes off like a cluster bomb - I remember reading that and thinking "damn right!"

I know that there are those that shy away from them, but part of the appeal of D6 for me is the act of throwing down 22D6 after spending a Force Point and tallying up all that buttery D6 awesomeness - rolling 2D10 as percentiles, or 1D20, or even 2D6 (I say as an old-school Traveller guy) just doesn't feel as good to me...

For those that dislike the large dice pools, of course, there are the alternatives mentioned above, but there are those of us out here that groove on the "cluster bomb" of dice exploding across the tabletop... :D

[imported_Magman]

OK getting back on the subject. I think we established that a handful of D6 is NOT a weakness for D6 :D.

OK any more thoughts about something that is a weakness?

[Lee Torres]

Sorry, sir, my bad, jumpin' on the bandwagon all crazy-like there... :o

Although the Open D6 project could change this, I think the biggest weakness D6 has had since right after the "Golden Age" of WEG, during the Star Wars RPG days, was lack of support for the product - it just never really was there - Men In Black had next to none, DC Universe had better support for a short while, Metabarons had next to none - I personally thought that the products that WEG did as Masterbook releases (Tank Girl, Indiana Jones, Necroscope, Tales from the Crypt, etc.), should have been D6 releases.

If Open D6 got more product out there, and a significant proportion of that was good product, I think D6 would rise to the category of "contender" the way that more heavily backed systems like D20, Unisystem, and some other middleweight/heavyweight game mechanics enjoy now.

As far as the system itself, I think it could handle "low-powered" or "gritty" campaigns better, but I've got enough house rules gleaned from the internet to know that the problem is easily remedied with very minor changes (like lowering the attribute dice available to beginning characters from 18 to 15 or lower).

[Grimace]

Well, that's more of a weakness in the company, not in the system itself. So while I might agree with you to some extent, it's not really a weakness of the D6 system.

So beyond the "fistful of dice", which was basically addressed with the die simplification chart, does anyone else have anything that they consider a weakness of the D6 system? I've got a list that I came up with myself, but I'm holding off posting because I want to see what others think first.

[hellsreach]

I weakness is the current and old versions of D6 would be that Dodging, in system canon, is a replacemtn for range modifiers, rather that a suppliment. Thus, at any reasonable range, attempts to defend yourself would end up making it more likely to be hit, rather than less.

This is changed with suggested rules that allow range to either modify the dodge difficulty or taking the higher of dodge rolls or range. Still, the rule as it stands is a fault, to me.

[Kalzazz]

I think the multiaction rules encourage very conservative and slow paced play, as people are wary of attacking more than once due to not wanting to lower there dodge more than one die, this combined with the relatively low chances to flatten someone in one shot unless using extremely powerful weapons means fights can really drag

[asmkm22]

play warhammer fantasy for a while and D6 will feel like dicing in monopoly.

[hellsreach]

I think the multiaction rules encourage very conservative and slow paced play, as people are wary of attacking more than once due to not wanting to lower there dodge more than one die, this combined with the relatively low chances to flatten someone in one shot unless using extremely powerful weapons means fights can really drag

To me, the multi-action rules are fabulous. The fault lies in the dodge rolls. I favor Torg's approach to defensive actions. That is, all person's have a passive defense roll that is automatic and does not affect the actions one may take in a combat round, and that passive defense roll is the target number for your opponant. Defense does not take an action and does not reduce the number of dice on your attack roll. A player may instead to take "all out" actions. That is, if you take an "all out" attack, you may add 1D to any subsequent actions in that turn, but your passive defense roll is equal to "0" for that turn (which pretty much means you WILL be hit by anyone swinging and you are almost guarenteed to be hit be someone using ranged weapons). Likewise, and "all out" defense, means you add +1D to any defensive action for that turn, but means you cannot do anything other than protect your butt for that turn.

For D6, cards, powers or anything else that give a player an additional or "free" action, basically only gets an additional +1D to your skills for the purpose of multiple actions, so such powers could be used to make both an "all out" defense AND attack as their dice allow, or perform an "all out" attack and still get their passive defense.

[Crusis]

That's sort of how we're building GravDrive, HR, with dodge and armor adjusted into one automatic roll no matter how many times you're attacked. We're adjusting for range in a different fashion, that shall be shared 'later'. :)

[Kalzazz]

I may consider that, seems like a good idea hellsreach . . . have any specific thoughts how you would implement it?

What Ive done is give people extra actions for every 10 they get on init, and there are assorted init boosting things in existence as well

[Stormchild]

I may consider that, seems like a good idea hellsreach . . . have any specific thoughts how you would implement it?

What Ive done is give people extra actions for every 10 they get on init, and there are assorted init boosting things in existence as well

That is what I always felt was a lack of Torg and D6. Especially in settings with Cyberware or Speed Powers (Torg's Cyberpapacy and Nile Empire, Shatterzone, Star Wars) you need rules to reflect this. This was done very good in Shadowrun (esp. the 4th edition) very similar to what you stated.

[hellsreach]

I may consider that, seems like a good idea hellsreach . . . have any specific thoughts how you would implement it?

What Ive done is give people extra actions for every 10 they get on init, and there are assorted init boosting things in existence as well

I don't personally add the idea of Init in games, nor would I really feel overly comfortable leaving the "flurry of actions" thing to a random roll. Fate/Force and Character Points allow players to use there in game currency to boost their die rolls which they may freely use to make additional actions. Leaving it to chance means you might have a high number of actions when it is not dramatically appropriate. I favor the use of cards because the while the card draw is random (which we games tend to like), but the USE of the card is up to the player, to determine the best time.

Another way, if you dont use cards, is to give people "tokens" for rolling very high on init or other rolls. Those tokens could then be used at any time in that encounter for additional actions. After that encounter, the tokens are simply lost.

[Kalzazz]

I cannibalized it from SR3, though using what I understand is more a SR2 than SR1 interpretation

hellsreach - I can accept that idea, but Ill admit, CP and Force Points while I dont consider a flaw per se are something I have never been able to enjoy or get into at all . . . I have never liked the idea of rationing of innate abilities, be they SW Character Points, DnD spells/day, or anything else like that. But thats my own very weird quirkiness and thus probably not worth discussing. Things happening based on random luck/chance however is something Ive always enjoyed, and the extra actions based on init roll (and my use of fumbles and criticals) helps add (in my own warped view) a healthier dose of randomness to the game

[hellsreach]

I cannibalized it from SR3, though using what I understand is more a SR2 than SR1 interpretation

hellsreach - I can accept that idea, but Ill admit, CP and Force Points while I dont consider a flaw per se are something I have never been able to enjoy or get into at all . . . I have never liked the idea of rationing of innate abilities, be they SW Character Points, DnD spells/day, or anything else like that. But thats my own very weird quirkiness and thus probably not worth discussing. Things happening based on random luck/chance however is something Ive always enjoyed, and the extra actions based on init roll (and my use of fumbles and criticals) helps add (in my own warped view) a healthier dose of randomness to the game

That makes sense, but I'm the opposite. I do not like randomness where it is not dramatically appropriate. At the same time, my game style lends itself to highly dramatic play. In all, there is not a lot of randomness to your own abilities. There are subtle variations in the way we act and perform thngs, but not gross randomness. At that same time, in life and especially in theatrical/literary drama, we see people becoming MORE effective at such times where dramtically appropriate. We don't see things being more random or less random. We simply see people tend towards improved performance.

Charcter and Fate points dont really "ration" inate abilites as much as represent our natural "improved" abilities when under stress. Lets face it, when you are watching a movie and the dramatic music starts playing, you don't see people behaving or performing the same way they were minutes before. They get much better. There might be mistakes or flaws, but only to increase tension and make the finale all the more grand. The protagonists make get their butts kicked repeated throughout a movie or book, but in the end fate tends to be on their side, and they win.

[skeloric]

To be honest, I'm more likely to see the flaws in OTHER systems when I compare them to my D6 books.

[Crusis]

To be honest, I'm more likely to see the flaws in OTHER systems when I compare them to my D6 books.

I'm feeling that way more and more. I'd have a boatload of money if I sold my 2nd Ed AD&D collection.. ;)

Simplicity, Speed, and Versatility. A gamer can't ask for more than that, really.

[Whill]

1 weakness is the current and old versions of D6 would be that Dodging, in system canon, is a replacement for range modifiers, rather that a suppliment. Thus, at any reasonable range, attempts to defend yourself would end up making it more likely to be hit, rather than less.

This is changed with suggested rules that allow range to either modify the dodge difficulty or taking the higher of dodge rolls or range. Still, the rule as it stands is a fault, to me.

Thanks Eric. That solves it for me! I have long entertained but never fully accepted the whole "zigged when you should have zagged" justification for dodge possibly making it easier to hit someone. Taking the higher of the dodge roll or range difficulty is a very simple solution. So if your dodge is not that effective, it ends up being just as difficult for the shooter to hit you as if you hadn't dodged, not easier. And this system still allows for the declared all-out dodge action where you do nothing else and the dodge roll is added on top of the range difficulty.

And of course if a GM wanted to maintain a bit of "zigging" in the system, you could rule that if you roll a 1 on the wild die, then the roll replaces the dodge, even if lower than the base difficulty. So about 5 out of every 6 times you reactively dodge, your dodge would definitely not make it easier to be hit. And 1 out of every 6 times it may and may not make it easier, depending on the results. So rolling a 1 on the wild die of your dodge could be thought of as a "complication" that effects game mechanics. And a GM could rule that does not even apply to the all-out dodge.

Thank you thank you!

[Grimace]

Okay, I'm going to put in what I consider to be weaknesses of the D6 system. Some of them have been addressed (or may have been, depending) while others still need to be worked on.

1. D6 can't handle high power "discrepancies" well. What I mean by this is having something like (to borrow from superheroes) a common person, a superhero like Spiderman, and then the step up to a superhero like Superman, and then going up again to someone like Galactus from Marvel fame.

2. D6 doesn't easily cross genres due to its skills/attribute listing for the various books.

3. D6 doesn't easily handle "balanced" technology differences across the genres.

4. The system doesn't have too many aspects for "building" things. They have the starship construction, but not much else.

5. When a character gets highly skilled, they roll oodles of dice.

6. Vehicle combat is generally considered a bit on the poor side as far as resolving quickly.

7. Cannot do massed combat.



Now the oodles of dice has been covered with the die code simplification, which was a very nice inclusion. Godsend Agenda may have figured a way to make the high power levels work, but I don't have it so I don't know. And I'm personally working on trying to come up with fixes for 2 and 3.

[skeloric]

Mass Combat?
Easy.
Armies are characters.
Take an army full of Dex 2d/ Fire Combat 2d and 100 strong [and thus 100 HPs] against another that is full of Dex 3d/ Fire Combat 3d but of only 50 [and thus 50 HPs] and run it like a battle.
Between the two groups each treated as an individual one can play all massive battles as if they are "mook fights".
A force can break off and takes its men in HPs to create a second combatant.
Which will force the other to remain together or separate as well.
Weapons still cause the damage thay have always caused in general as long as the groups are always 10 to 20 or more, so that a weapon wielded by a group of ten represented as single amalgam will kill as many soldiers of a separate group as it otherwise would do to one individually.

A group smaller than 10 is doomed within a round of "mass combat" and thus should be isolated singular individuals receiving "incidental fire" as they fail to present a mass that an opposing force would offer.

this works in "Hit Point mode" rather than "Wound mode" and thus isn't completely workable.
But it was a method offered in the old D&D Rules Cyclopedia and makes a quick 'n' easy sort of sense that really appeals to me.

[pathfinderap]

Okay, I'm going to put in what I consider to be weaknesses of the D6 system. Some of them have been addressed (or may have been, depending) while others still need to be worked on.

1. D6 can't handle high power "discrepancies" well. What I mean by this is having something like (to borrow from superheroes) a common person, a superhero like Spiderman, and then the step up to a superhero like Superman, and then going up again to someone like Galactus from Marvel fame.

2. D6 doesn't easily cross genres due to its skills/attribute listing for the various books.

3. D6 doesn't easily handle "balanced" technology differences across the genres.

4. The system doesn't have too many aspects for "building" things. They have the starship construction, but not much else.

5. When a character gets highly skilled, they roll oodles of dice.

6. Vehicle combat is generally considered a bit on the poor side as far as resolving quickly.

7. Cannot do massed combat.


Those are all valid points, and a design challange to everyone,

[Dorsai]

I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. A magic system that most D6 players are happy with. I see this trotted out as one of the biggest arguments against using it for fantasy, and I have to agree somewhat. The magic system in Fantasy and Adventure is just way too cumbersome and time-consuming. I've thought about trying to adapt the old Star Wars force powers, or tracking down some of the older magic systems (DC Heroes, Indiana Jones, other supernatural systems from Star Wars).

[The Game Guy]

I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. A magic system that most D6 players are happy with. I see this trotted out as one of the biggest arguments against using it for fantasy, and I have to agree somewhat. The magic system in Fantasy and Adventure is just way too cumbersome and time-consuming. I've thought about trying to adapt the old Star Wars force powers, or tracking down some of the older magic systems (DC Heroes, Indiana Jones, other supernatural systems from Star Wars).

I would agree that magic system is one of the major weaknesses in D6. I dont think it would take too much to cobble together a new system that would work better.

Sadly, no one has tried to (not that I am aware of).

[Stormchild]

I haven't tried the D6 magic system yet. I read it but this is certainly not enough. I tried the Masterbook magic system, it worked like a charm. Lacmus test: a new spell created in under 5 minutes on a con by someone who had never played masterbook before. I tried to understand the Torg magic system and I failed.

Is the D6 magic system easier or harder than Masterbook?

[Grimace]

I guess it depends on what people are looking for as "better". Are people wanting something where they have to create the spells? Do they want one that just has a plethora of spells already made?

Basically, what's "better" in everyone's opinion?

[Kalzazz]

The magic system constantly ping pongs in my mind between 'one of D6s greatest strengths' and 'one of D6s greatest weaknesses'

I think a book full of spell templates would be great, giving mostly worked out spells that could be quickly adjusted to what the player wants (considering they likely want a spell scaled to how good their spellcasting skills are)

[Cryonic]

I think that was the plan for the Magic book that was slated for D6. IIRC it got scrapped as Eric was going to rework the magic system.

[hellsreach]

The Magic book had a lot of problems as written. I think there were too many writers involved, with insufficient levels of direction. The result was a manuscript with FAR too many errors and problems to the point that and editor working to fix them all, which as well have rewritten the book from scratch.

[Kalzazz]

Sorry, wasnt trying to attack the lack of magic book Eric

What I was trying to say was that while I liked the example spells and such, they didn't fit characters very well as a given character would be liable to be overqualified or underqualified to throw a given spell

So something like 'Fireball', which had everything for a fireball except the damage and so on, and then a table below

DC 10 4d damage
DC 12 5d damage
and so on would be nice, so the player could just pick the DC to match their casting ability

[hellsreach]

Sorry, wasnt trying to attack the lack of magic book Eric

What I was trying to say was that while I liked the example spells and such, they didn't fit characters very well as a given character would be liable to be overqualified or underqualified to throw a given spell

So something like 'Fireball', which had everything for a fireball except the damage and so on, and then a table below

DC 10 4d damage
DC 12 5d damage
and so on would be nice, so the player could just pick the DC to match their casting ability


I didn't feel attacked in any way. Simply saying why it was not put out and it realy had almost nothing to do with we wanting to rewrite the system. Heck, with Open D6, the more magic systems that work with the core the better.

[Kalzazz]

Okay, cool

I do really like the magic system, and havent really made many changes to it in games I run, just wish somehow it was better