Clicked on your video because I'm learning about dice mechanics for my own system. I love your dice pool "# of successes determines what you can do" thing. I might have to iterate on that.

Second System for sure. Have a grit system which for everytime you are hit by the enemy you git one grit. You then can spend the grit to modify either of the dice. I assume hit locations will have a damage modification number which can represent both armor and tender locations like head will do double damage while chest will hit a breast plate which reduces damage by 2 etc... Concerning how the monsters behave you might want to factor remaining hit points into the equation as a orc with 90% hit points shouldn't run away when the hero has 10% hitpoints left. Be even more interesting if you could think of more they could do besides flee, call a friend, drop thier treasure and run, beg for thier life(with a karma system), ask to become a henchmen, play dead, become enraged, become dazed, spit in your face, belittles your manhood....definitely want a system that includes the monster and hero in same roll.

Also, I like these journal episodes. Please continue. I love to hear what other designers have to say.

These two systems feel like completely different games. The dice pool feels like faster, more aggressive, adrenaline-inducing combat. The other system feels much slower, more tactical, and requires crunchier decisions and more mitigation. So it depends on the emotional feeling you want the game to communicate. Regarding the dice pool, I’ve been tinkering with a combat system that might inspire you: - Roll a number of d6 dice based on a skill’s level (3 dice is the max) - If you roll 4-6, it’s a success. However, a 6 is a “crit” and you can reroll that 6 to get even more successes. (This is the “exploding dice” mechanic the Sadler brothers use in their games) - Then your weapon has different effects based on the number of successes you rolled. For example: 1 Success=1 Hit. 2 Successes=3 Hits. 3 Successes=3 Hits+Stun. (Lord of the Rings: Journeys in Middle Earth uses this hit system and it’s great) Hope this helps and can’t wait to see where the game goes!

Sorry if someone said this already, but maybe a way to combine both mechanics would be for the player to expend energy to upgrade his die from a D6 to a D8 to a D10, etc rather than upgrading the number of dice rolled. Some enemies might start with a D6 and others a D12. Thanks for these videos! I've been enjoying them after just finding them recently

With the D6 system, I think the norm should be degrading damage with each successful success. This feels like fatigue setting in as I strike more & more. This also allows for some weapons to be exciting outliers that don't follow the norm of degrading damage. With the D12 system, I think it does feels unique and streamlined. I love that. Swingy dice, cognitive load, and maybe onboarding are its only negatives. • For the Swingy dice factor some suggestions are: a numerical value (skill, proficiency, attribute, ability score, ect..) added to the die result; luck/destiny/power points to: reroll one die, add bonus numeric value to one die, add an additional die to the dice pool, add an additional die to the dice pool then discard the lowest die in the dice pool; one use items to manipulate the dice. • What I mean by onboarding is that I needed to rewatch your vid twice when you explained the D12 system combat to really understand. So, to me, it feels hard to explain. • By cognitive load, I mean the combat resolution requires a set of steps to process. Check for highest result, apply a numeric value to reduce the difference, check modified difference of results, find hit location, apply damage. So maybe not a beer & pretzels game, which is all good. I personally like that level of complexity.

About the idea of weapons doing different, set amounts of damage for different numbers of successes (or even totally different types of effects), that is somewhat similar to a board game I saw once (the name escapes me, sadly), where there were "steps" to an attack roll. The more steps you got (essentially, the higher you rolled) the better the damage, with set thresholds for such-and-such amounts (Roll a minimum of, say, 6 points for the basic damage, or roll 8 for a large hit etc). What was neat about this was that different weapons behaved differently, like for example some weapons only having a couple of steps and usually dealing a pretty dependable amount of damage, and some weapons dealing only a small amount to begin with, but having a higher ceiling. I thought that was a pretty neat trick, meant that you could differentiate brutish, simple weapons from those that demand a lot of skill to really get the most out of them. You could very well do similar things with a dice pool system, where different weapons have different profiles for what X successes gets you.

This is awesome Jason! I personally like your 2nd system better, because it's fairly unique and highly streamlined. The enemy reaction system is super interesting how it plays out, because how the player does in the attack directly impacts the reaction. I do think the choice to spend energy to add mitigation is a good idea to help add agency.

The skirmish game system used for Warlord's - Strontium Dog, Judge Dredd and the most recent one Slaine - is one of the most fluid and rapid pace dice systems I've played

I’m building a combat system that uses competitive die rolls similar to your 2D12 idea. Rather than each character getting a round of attacks, they engage and the better (modified) roll wins the round. The damage is determined largely by the difference in die rolls (modified by fighting styles, armor, and weapon type). This introduces a sort of bell curve so that extreme results are more exciting. This also requires me to create a largely simultaneous action system that somehow doesn’t bog down or prevent players from doing cool individual actions.

Cool shirt!

I think the second mechanic with the d12s is exciting. I love the fact that you are thinking about hit location and monster reaction contained within the same roll as the damage and who hit who. Personally, I feel with some minor mitigation,( perhaps items/ability/buff spells) to influence a portion of the roll (hit location buff spell as an example) you could eliminate some of the worry that the dice rolls are too based on luck. I look forward to what you decide on!

I like the six sided die combat method for the game you are developing.

Really enjoyed this. I'm gonna watch all your videos. I'm a board game enthusiast as well and an indie designer. I just saw another content creator playing your game Iron Helm and I'm gonna pick it up to try out the design.

I am happy you are doing this. Thanks for the great games. I'm excited for what's to come!

Ok so I finally decided to create a game I had in mind for a while and I landed on TCG's website. This is where I found your games and fell in love with your mechanics. I bought gate and tin helm (can't wait to receive them) and will definitely watch this entire series to help me with my game. Keep going man what you do is awesome !

I’m certainly struggling on how to do Combat in my newer smaller version of Quest for the Lost Pixel. I can’t decide between dice combat and card combat.

The way you describe it. It seems like a system like that. Broadsword 1: 1 damage Broadsword2: 2 damage Broadsword 3: 3 damage. If you do 2 success you do 1+2=3 damage. What would be nice is being able to setup your own sequence. Like Shield 1 -Broadsword 2 - fire 3 If you have 1 succes you only does the shield effet (damage reduction) If you have two you do shield 1 -Broadsword 2. Monsters could have a set sequence and the player make his own. Like with Broadsword, Crossbow, shield, healing, fire lightning, etc. Things like that.

I prefer mitigation for dice rolls because without it I feel like I have no agency. Full RNG feels bad to me but partial RNG adds excitement and tension.

I found this channel why looking for rule alternative for my D&D 5e group. I cant decide if I want to try and write something or not. I'm really enjoying your channel. Very interesting!

initiative and damage / reactions are a nice smooth line. You conclusion on that system would be correct. I would look at a split system . Keep The great work Jason.

Well done!!

My favourite combat dice mechanic is the one used in Galaxy Defenders. You roll X amount of d10 attack dice (each with a specific number of HIT sides). For each HIT you roll, the enemy rolls that many d10 defence dice (each with a specific number of SHIELD sides). For each SHIELD they roll, it blocks 1 HIT. All unblocked HITS each equate to 1 point of damage. I roll 4 Attack dice and get 2 HITS. Enemy rolls 2 Defence dice and gets 1 SHIELD. 1 of my HITS is blocked but the other one goes through and deals 1 damage.

I think the most wide range mechanic is the d6 one ... is more exciting throwing more dice ... and encoraging sucess on the roll ... excites me more ... more simple and more in the major context for larger audiences ... but its like you said ... think in your audience , the gamers and designers ...

I'm partial to the second system because of the 1 roll = 1 round, and because of the novelty. I like the hit location and enemy reaction ideas it contains, too. Perhaps instead of choosing power beforehand, you have a limited amount of AP you can spend after roll on abilities to do rerolls, +/- to a die, etc. AP would be awarded in the game only rarely, so you'd have to weigh whether worth it to cancel an enemy's blow, or just take the damage; bump your attack to a higher tier now, or hope to roll it naturally next time, etc.

The d12 mechanic is excellent, and has a lot of potential. Just now finding this video, so I'm sure you've done something with this. It honestly reminds me more of a TTRPG system than a board game system; it even seems to have the potential to serve as a sort of "Narrative dice" system, a-la the Gensys system.

Enjoyed your video. Let me think on this and I'll get back to ya!

Your idea about expending energy to dictate the size of a dice pool sounds quite similar to something I've been working on (ostensibly just a personal project). What I find intresting about a flexible dice pool is that it allows for quite dynamic situations, especially if you want other actions during a combat round to also require dice and allow other participants to possibly spend their dice to attempt to contradict enemy actions (for example, allow them to spend energy to roll some of their own dice, with results of X negating dice from the original pool). It also works well if you care about the number of successes, so getting more means a bigger effect or an additional effect. Some of these ideas are admittedly better for group play since they're a bit fiddly if you're overseeing all the pools and spends, but I've found the overall idea pretty satisfying to toy around with.

Jason, Check out Spires End.

I enjoy the second mechanic personally. It simple and all encompassing. I agree it feel like there is too much luck involved but I think you could mitigate this with cards or wagering mechanics. 2 suggestions if you go with the second one: 1. Add a 3rd dice for hit location names (leg, arms .etc) who ever wins the combat, hits said location. This doesn't even need to be D12. 2. My favorite mechanics is in Tin Helm, the way the dungeon is made. I think this mechanic can be modify to give different target number for each enemy OR even used to decide Hit location instead of a third dice. GAME SUGGESTION: I know you didn't ask but I recommend playing Spires End. It very thematic, but it mostly combat and choose your own adventure. It handles combat very uniquely. Partially due to the cards size but base on what you are trying to do, it could give you some ideas.

Have you played Too Many Bones by Chip Theory Games? Lots of dice used for character build and combat.

I like the combat dice mechanism in burrows and badgers

I would definitely enjoy the first combat system it is similar to your other games. Combined with cards perhaps with the monster (a dice minimum # or random dice roll can be added for its strength/weapon bonus) perhaps similar to the alien cards in desolate. The second system sounds interesting, however I am wondering if the combat resolution would take too much time (such as damage for 4, to an appendage or armor, next round another limb, oh no here comes a Beholder or Kraken :) perhaps it might be a 2 limb defeat for regular baddies?). The other issue might be too much randomness with the die rolls. Sometimes my games end rather quickly with several bad dice rolls. Great video btw, I was wondering if you had ever considered damage to equipment especially with this new system? Your broadsword attack bonus could drop with direct hits/blocks of heavy attacks. Other equipment (armor, helm) as well could block less after a critical hit...not sure if this might be too much maintenance for a solo player? I'm assuming cube tracking could be done on the equipment cards to keep a minimum value. A reverse crafting system (unbroken -> broken), I suppose you could have repair /spells /sharpening options or switch weapons during or after combat

D6 pros is the levels of the attack. It would be exciting to hope for 1 success, but when you hit double, or even triple success, you would jump up at the table with joy. You'd even be pretty thrilled when an enemy does something really cool. Although maybe you and the enemy always roll 3 and the energy spent allows you to increase a die after the roll. Or, to make it a one roll system, roll 3 die and 1s and 2s are successes for the enemy. Spend energy to either change a 2 to a 3 and avoid getting hit, or spend energy to make a 4 to a 5 for a hit. D12 pro is that you can have reactions based off of that round of combat. But does that remove those tiered attacks from the d6 approach? If possible, write up the goblin and hero in the 2 different systems and put them out in a test run to see what people like better.

the D12 method is a lot like the Frostgrave combat system.

I like the idea of spending ahead of time in order to add mitigation to the d12's. Might be interesting if it was more of a wager that a cost. Add a d4 to your d12 but if you roll a 4 on the d4 you miss. Or spend x energy to add +x to your role but if that attack fails the energy is lost permanently.

Jason, have you ever looked at the Talisman Adventure RPG, and the D6 system it uses? It's SO GOOD.

Pour le second système, il serait peut-être plus logique que ce soit la différence des valeurs des dés qui détermine le comportement de l'ennemi (une échelle allant de -11 à 11). . Si c'est 11, ça signifie que l'ennemi à fait 12 et que le héros à fait 1. Donc il serait plus enclin à être agressif et à prendre des risques. . Inversement, si c'est -11, ça signifie que l'ennemi a fait 1 et que le héros à fait 12. Donc l'ennemi serait sur la défensive ou aurait envie de fuir. Concernant les deux systèmes, je n'ai pas vraiment d'idées, n'étant pas spécialement un adepte des dés. Le premier système a l'air d'être plus interactif entre le joueur et le jeu. Le second système à l'air d'être plus narratif en prenant en compte l'intensité des valeurs.

Yesssssss!!!!!!

Hey Jason! I'm a great fan. Watching the video I thought of a new combat dice mechanic that ismaybe is worth a try: you need a 5+ but you can also combine dice (that are not already 5 or 6, of course) A couple examples: - Let's say you roll 2/3/5 -> If you count 5-6, it'd be 1 hit. Now you can do 2+3 and 5, resulting in 2 hits. - On the next one you roll 4/1 -> If you count 5-6, it'd be 0 hits. Now you can do 1+4, resulting in 1 hit. It's more forgiving: you still should be lucky to get a 5-6 but you can also alleviate the luck of the dice. Thoughts? Thanks!

I really like your idea. I just subscribed your channel. It’s there’s any way you use this game by also using those little green army men? Roll the dice and depends what you want hit tanks,planes and men.,

Great video! I like the whole series. As I'm currently testing some different combat mechanics for my first boardgame attempt, I'm wondering if the mechanics are copyrighted? How do you deal with this problem? Thank you & keep it up! :)

On the substraction roll, which number comes first? 2-1 or 1-2? Always the highest first?

A weapon could have like a combo type damage. If you have 3 successes it could be like a combo attack. 1 success does the weapons basic attack, while more successes could do higher attacks based on the number of successes. Also, you could have it where gear and certain items/weapons could increase and decrease the dice rolls. I like the first system cause its fast and still has some strategy about how much energy to use. So far its my favorite of your combat designs personally.

Collecting multiple outcomes all into one roll tends to actually over complicate.

Also, I was wondering myself what you thought of narrative based dungeon quests for solo players? I've been currently designing my own dungeon delving game with narrative and story in the spot light over the need of lots of artwork. I want a few bits of artwork, but enough pops of it here and there sparingly since artwork is the number 1 problem I face because of time. I'm just worried that maybe there isn't an audience for it.

Thanks for the the video But I hate this mechanism so much 😅 I love me combat deterministic no random sorry

#dungeondive