Jump to content
D6 Online 3.0


Users Awaiting Email Confirmation
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About barrataria

  • Rank
    Member: Rank 2 ( 50% )
  • Birthday 10/01/1968
  1. This is pretty cool, thanks for posting. One suggestion... maybe you dismissed this as you wrote. But if you intend a simple game for kids, I suggest you create templates so that you can streamline the creation process. At the very least I'd create skill dice packages, along the lines of the old SW templates. Then your players can focus on the skills and whatnot. They are generally not going to be like former D&D players insistent on min-maxing, so they can jump right into skill assignment and you can move on with game prep.
  2. Seems like a good idea... I don't know how consistent it is with DS but I have used a table like this in the D6 fantasy setting I have put together. It's actually cool to have a random gen thing like this... gives players a little drama when building characters
  3. I unfortunately don't know squat about DarkSun, so I don't have much productive to say. I played D&D forever but only know the bits of DarkSun that were in AD&D originally. I like that you didn't try to totally reinvent everything, make it look like Dark Sun and feel like Dark Sun but stay MiniSix. Having worked forever on multiple D6 ideas I am a little envious of the simplicity I thought they looked cool and would suggest you spread the table out with more entries (even if it's not canonical for DarkSun). If you made the roll 2D instead, you would also have more room to play with the probability for "no event" as well. Thanks for posting this!
  4. Well, you could sell it for money. But don't do that unless you have to! It's easy to think you'll never game again, but trust me in 5 years you don't want to have to scramble around trying to find books again. Especially since we're talking about old out of print books. The RC isn't even (legally) available in PDF. Don't give up forever!
  5. Which can be a fine way to run a game, if you like gritty... the old Gangbusters system was murderous, but we didn't really understand it as teenagers... a lot of time waiting for characters in the hospital Made for tough adventure design, leaving all these breaks in the story for recuperation. The freedom to vary the wound levels is actually one thing I really like about using d6. Giving mooks fewer wound levels really helps stage combat (although of course said mooks can still get lucky with the wild dice!). I always thought HP worked well in the old D&D versions but I don't miss them when running other systems.
  6. Re body points/wounds, isn't that an option in a sidebar or something in the d6 books? Sorry I don't have them in front of me... it also might have been something Grimace mentioned once in one of his billion million posts... Yeah, it's a complaint I hear around the net, but not a problem I've had with my players (ever). Partially this is related to skill dice bloat IMO... but there are multiple ways to skin the goose. I don't use Fate Points, so that's one thing. Or skill specializations, again cutting down on stat bloat. I also use MiniSix static defense numbers to eliminate some die rolling. I've tried eliminating the soak roll too but, as you say, it's the kind the players like to make. People like rolling dice! There's a reason people have been playing with them for thousands of years! In D&D, many times new players would look at all those cool shapes and say... wait, we never roll those?!?! Not a problem with d6! I'm way too incompetent at math for that, but I can explain a bit. In SW, there are various categories: character, speeder, walker, etc. It's pretty well thought out, IMO, and I've found it works fine (when I think to use it). Now, think of a fantasy game. Human size, well that's character scale. How about a horse? One step up, right? How about a covered wagon? Or a stone gatehouse? Or a caravel? Or.... To me it's in fantasy games where this gets wackiest... In d6 Adventure, you have something like a zeppelin. It's big, but it's easy to damage. It's nice because you can use this to make creatures tougher, quickly, and if you scale in pips rather than dice I find that works better. Although it does require looking at a table (because I can't remember that stuff). There are quite a few threads about weapon damage and armor values here, I went round and round with those a couple years back, and others have done the same with firearms stats. Basically, d6 changed the melee damage stat from STR to 1/2 lifting score. Then, they rejiggered weapon and armor stats as well. In my experience, and I think Grimace's too, the stats are borked, so that attacks don't do enough damage. I have tried various things, and my most recent approach is to just go back to the SW values, tweaking the wound levels slightly. I think the d6 System book values are OK too (and I think that's what the MiniSix guys worked from). Sorry I was banned here for a long time, somebody pushed the wrong button I guess. As for rpg.net things tend to spin off into the weeds quickly. Never used body points, so I dunno. I will say this is a worse problem in SW or other games when creatures or aliens get special goodies ON TOP OF high strength, like barabels. How many damned wookiees and barabels are there floating around space anyway? As for the blaster-proof wookiee, I don't deny it's a problem, and as everyone and their cousin on the big purple will repeat constantly, needing to houserule something to make the system work is not great. However, it's not totally unlike the D&D character with armor of invulnerability or anything else. Use things that do damage not reduced by STR. How about grenades, stunguns, teargas, (as you or someone noted) combined actions (and/or masses of opponents), tactical advantages (cover, etc). It's an issue but IMO one that is pretty easily resolved. Oh, and note that melee weapon damage caps are good (see SWR&E) to make sure the wookiee with the cutlass doesn't do 11D damage In general, I prefer to deal with the blaster-proof wookiee directly in game, rather than nerfing everything else.
  7. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your question, but you can "change" OGC all you want because it's open game content. That's the whole point. However, you can't use "Product Identity". So, for example, you can revise the rules to look like the SW d6 rules, for instance, but including "blaster" and "lightsaber" skills might be problematic, because those aren't in the OGC in d6 Space. And PI includes trademarks, so you can't call your new d6 game "Fires of Amatsumara", for instance. Also, you can't put the genie back in the bottle. In other words, if you cut and paste d6 Space into a new book and call it "openspace rpg", you can call it "Product Identity" if you want, but you'd never be able to enforce a copyright claim because your entire game is already OGC by virtue of d6 Space making it OGC. Once something is released into the wild as open game content, it can't be closed again. If, for instance, you change the game by using d8s, make it a wild west gunfighting game, and make playable races only out of reptile-men. You could call all those things, the names you give them, the text you use to describe them, product identity. If you declare those OGC, someone else could take them and use them as part of their recipe for a new game someday.
  8. Not exactly, although it would be a logical abstraction for GMs. But even I, half-asser that I am, try to stick to missile/weapon ranges outdoors. Especially for ships, and I really want this to work for seaborne encounters.
  9. Thanks Grim. Yes, there would of course be modifiers for the conditions you mention, although for outdoor/waterborne movement there would be less of them. I don't mind having a separate mechanic for underground encounter distance, because it's really a mechanic for determining surprise. I don't think the range bands are necessary for dungeon play, and worse I think it would be hard to set range bands that work for dungeon rooms, underground caverns, and whatever else. This way the surprise/encounter distance thing can be resolved in one opposed roll (and this only when it's not obvious from the dungeon design where an encounter occurs). A 0 result point total would be simultaneous combat; low totals would indicate a close or moderate distance, and lopsided result point totals would indicate a moderate-long distance and one or more surprise rounds.
  10. So, I've been thinking about a way to randomize encounter distances (for when the GM doesn't set them as part of a scenario). I didn't see anything similar in d6 books or SW (but I'm willing to be corrected) so I just started doodling. At first I thought about figuring based on result points from an opposed check. So, 0 = right next to each other, over 20= really far away (with the high score getting initiative, of course). But when I tried to figure a way to get decent ranges for different environments (underground, wilderness, at sea) the results looked a little wacky. Then I backed up and tried from a wargame angle. Instead of a directly opposed roll, each side (assuming two sides) rolls against a target number at a set distance. If both miss, they approach one range category and try again next turn/round. If both sides make it, they see each other. If only one makes the roll, it spots the other side, and the other tries again the next round (assuming the spotting side doesn't just flee). I'm not sure where all I've seen this kind of mechanic, but it's a common thing for naval games (esp. submarines) with hidden movement. It's tense and frustrating to know there's something somewhere, but not be able to spot it (especially if it starts shooting at you!). After a couple hours of back and forth I'm thinking to use the first way (opposed roll) for dungeon/underground encounters, since it's fairly easy to conceive the range of distances. For wilderness and seaborne (and airborne) encounters, I'll use range bands with target numbers, depending on the terrain and conditions. So, spotting at sea on a clear day would be like a 5, and at night or in dense fog in swamp or woods would be 18 (or whatever). At sea the distances would be in 2 km increments, on land 500m or some such. Has anyone tinkered with anything like this?
  11. I can refer you to this site: http://www.daemonstorm.com/role-playing/d6-system/D6-Probabilities-with-the-Wild-Die which will help you guesstimate rough probabilities. But in general Grimace is right, and my tedious experiments with d20 probability conversion support his claims. It will likely be easier to just set the difficulty in d6 as befits your adventure (and what you think should be easy and what should be challenging).
  12. Well said, and thanks for sharing this again. As you might recall from our correspondence a while back, "increasing the staying power" was not something I had a problem with, I had combats going on for eons with no damage. It's better now, but I look forward to testing some more. And now I've seen a Rancor Pit post where folks were discussing that the quality of the shot, not the weapon, should matter more. At your suggestion I've used result points to increase missile damage in fantasy games... maybe the die code of the weapon should be affected by the result points from the hit. More to noodle on. Thanks as always!
  13. Thanks as usual fellas. I didn't realize it was recycling 1E. I guess the math problem would be mine, since I make the resistance rolls for NPCs. I might try this out but I'm not inclined to ditch the 2E scale (as I've tweaked it). I also guess that would really magnify the blaster-proof wookiee problem? Since now you don't just have to get 8 points over his resistance, you have to double it up or triple it up?
  14. Checking through my d6 fantasy mashup, I've been looking at SW and the d6 cookbook to see what different options for each core rule existed. I don't think I ever looked at the wound levels I was surprised to see that instead of working from raw damage numbers they are based on multiples of resistance totals. So a hit doing less than 2X the resistance total is 1 wound, 2X the resistance is 2 wounds, 3x the resistance total is 3 wounds, up to 5-6x the resistance total inflicting 5 wounds. It seems to me that this drastically softens the wound table, but I'm curious how this has worked in practice for people if anyone's tried it. It certainly flattens out the wild die results (good for keeping a PC alive I guess).
  15. A little thread necromancy perhaps? I'm rethinking my d6 Fantasy approach and came across this thread and wanted to share why this isn't an issue for what I'm doing. First, I'm keeping the old 2D-4D range for human attributes (although I'm tweaking them for custom human races, few will go as low as 1D). Second,I am keeping Magic as an attribute, for the reasons harmyn lists. Casting magic will burn CP, and this thread(and some story points I'm considering) has made me think that magic will be some kind of inborn type of power. So, a dumb but magically adept character is OK, and an orc or lizard man spellcaster will often be prime examples of this in my world. But the human wizard template will feature high INT and scholar, language, etc. type default skills. Mostly because this will balance out parties somewhat and make it more likely the group will have attributes and skills in something other than brawling/melee. There will also be a "hedge wizard" type of character too, with less emphasis on INT but in that case the INT skills will be more like survival and alchemy. Just a few thoughts, happy new year all.
  • Create New...