“Apparata Kitbash is a tabletop RPG work-in-progress. It’s sort of a side-project right now, using the same setting as my PC game (OBSCURON). Over time, I will document the homebrew rules, design and materials that I’ve felt compelled to add to a game I DM on a regular basis. With the encouragement of my players, we will playtest these. Eventually I hope to accumulate enough suitable rules + content so that others can play this game too.”
Combat Rolls with Modifier Dice
I’m taking my Mixed-Success combat rolls for 5E and expanding them further for Apparata Kitbash.
For reference, here’s the related chart for the 5E version, rendered via AnyDice. Slightly more illustrative than my hand-drawn whiteboard chart (in that previous article). The math is linear, not complex: Each modifier just moves the numbers 5%, a side of the d20:
It’s been put through a few paces with my weekly group: Speeding up combat rounds, even as players are learning how it works.
The chart now changes for Apparata Kitbash, with dice-as-modifiers. I’ll discuss that whole concept in a later post, but basically it means rolling additional dice with the d20, rather than adding numeric modifiers after the roll. Anywhere from a d4 up to 2d8. Here’s the AnyDice chart:
Note: the Success range expanded (to 11-19). That was necessary: random die rolls aren’t nearly as beneficial as guaranteed modifiers. It makes the failure range (1-10) easier for players to track as well.
The mixed-success shaves off some percentage at the higher modifiers. I suppose that shouldn’t have surprised me as much as it did. High level characters get a big jump from the d12 to 2d8 as well, which I feel is appropriate: I wouldn’t expect players to use a d14 or d16, those dice are too uncommon. I don’t use a d20 modifier-dice because that would be confusing with the primary d20, especially for Advantage / Disadvantage rolls.
I like the variance of dice. I’ve never been comfortable with high-level players achieving “I can never miss” godlike powers to hit or make skill tests. I would rather give them amazing things to do without avoiding the chance of failure.
I have not made up my mind whether this same method will be used towards skill tests, but I am leaning in that direction. This dice-modifier variation has not been tested in combat or otherwise yet, so it’s bound to need some tuning either way.
It’s less granular than 5E’s “bound accuracy” modifiers, but I’m okay with that. I still need to determine the stats / ability numbers that will feed which dice get rolled. I had to determine the system first and now I can work backwards to those numbers from here. So far I assume modifiers will range from 1-to-16 to line up nicely with the dice.
I’m keen on trying this out.
Mixed-Success Combat Rolls for 5E
Last week I cryptically posted a whiteboard chart to my social media. Here’s an update to that chart, with an explanation of how I’m using it for 5th Edition (and will adapt it to Apparata Kitbash later):
The concept of a “mixed” or “partial” success dice-rolling system is not new. It’s been popularized with Apocalypse World and continued in a host of games “Powered by the Apocalypse”. They use 2d6 rolls with 10-12 = success, 7-9 = partial-success and 6-or-less = failure. I like how Dungeon World describes it: “7–9 is still a success but it comes with compromises or cost.” In my version for 5E, the cost will give enemies the opportunity to attack back (and otherwise don’t take the usual turns).
d20 Mixed-Success System:
Note: I feel my players react well when I refer to a 20+ total as a “Grand Success” and the 14-19 range simply as “Success”. The psychological shift in terminology is probably effective, yet I still like saying “Mixed-Success”. Regardless, it should be treated as the standard result.
Why? How does this work?
My primary goal is to speed up combat: I’ve removed Initiative. On a player’s mixed-success or failure, enemies make a reactive attack at the end of the player’s turn. Neither side makes any additional rolls to see if they hit, just this player-facing roll of testing for success. AC is no longer used to calculate hits, but instead is used to mitigate damage (more on that below).
In practice, it means a player rolls for success and then immediately rolls for damage or not. The DM may also directly roll for damage appropriately from the enemy (occurs after the player’s completed turn).
I have not (yet) applied mixed-success to skill checks. If I do, I may use a different system because this is tuned for combat encounters.
Standard 5th Edition combat goes something like this:
- Combat starts out with each combatant rolling for Initiative. The first on the initiative chart takes a turn. During the first round, anyone caught “surprised” skips their first turn.
- The player (or enemy) chooses an action to make. If that action is an attack, they typically roll a d20 and add their appropriate modifier (for a melee attack that is typically STR + Proficiency). They state their total.
- The DM checks the total against the enemy’s AC, describes how it hits or misses. If it hits, the DM asks the player to roll for damage.
- The player rolls for damage.
- The DM subtracts the damage from the enemy’s health and describes what occurs (especially if it dies).
- The player may also use a bonus action and interaction, then it moves onto the next turn (back to step 2) on the Initiative list, including the enemies on the list.
Revised Mixed-Success combat goes like this:
- There are no Initiative rolls. Players take their turns in their already determined “marching order”. The DM may determine enemies to have “surprise” advantage and begin with related attacks, but otherwise enemies only act reactively, at the end of individual player turns.
- The player chooses an action. They may make a d20 attack roll, adding their modifiers and stating their total as normal. The player then knows whether they hit or not, using the chart. Any success is a hit. If they get a “Grand Success” then they have blocked the enemies from taking any reactive actions. If they hit in the mixed-success range, they still hit, but an enemy (usually the one they are attacking) will get a turn following theirs.
- The player may use a bonus action, interaction and end their turn.
- An enemy may take a turn only If the player’s attack roll resulted in mixed-success or failure AND there is an enemy with a turn left this round (one turn per combatant per round). Usually the DM chooses the enemy the player had attacked, but they don’t have to. After that it moves to the next player’s turn.
It may not seem like many less steps, but I’ve found that removing the back-and-forth on AC checks speeds things up considerable. There are other cool implications and I also I intend to take it further with Apparata Kitbash by reducing player-hesitations while adding modifiers (more on that in a future article).
If the player does not make any sort of attack roll, mixed-success is the default for their turn. Players cannot avoid enemy actions by only using spells or abilities that automatically hit or otherwise take no attack rolls.
I love the the potential for players to inherently strategize some crowd-control over their enemies.
A basic example:
- In a normal 5E combat first-round, Mirri might run up and melee-attack an Orc. Then Oula gets the next turn in the Initiative order and shoots her bow at the same Orc, with a crit for massive damage. A natural DM response for the Orcs eventual turn: The Orc throws an axe at Oula because she did so much damage and upset them.
- Mirri runs up and melee-attacks the Orc. The Orc immediately and reactively hits Mirri back. Now she has its full attention. Oula then shoots her bow at the same Orc, but her crit causes a Grand Success, so enemies don’t return-attack right now (plus that Orc has had its turn already).
Imagine how the players can manipulate the battlefield this way. Plus crits have a good, solid additional oomph to them!
Speaking of monsters: If a creature has legendary actions, those can still apply, or a DM can give that creature an additional turn per round after the players.
Armor Class doesn’t go away with this system. Make an easy conversion for AC to mitigate damage instead of being the to-hit target. For each player and monster, calculate an AC-bonus the same way you would a stat bonus : With every even number above 10, add a bonus point. For example, an AC of 16 would be an AC-bonus of +3 and an AC of 18 would be a +4.
The AC-bonus is used to subtract incoming damage. Simple mitigation.
I admit I haven’t done hard testing on AC-mitigation for creature balance just yet. I may change it outright to whatever is above 10 (so 18 becomes 8) or use a multiplier (AC-bonus x 1.5 ??) to tweak it. For the most part I feel CR ratings on 5E monsters are pretty loosely calculated as it is. Defining encounter difficulty is an inexact science. The point is it should feel fair to your players.
With Apocalypse World’s 2d6 rolls, the base chance rates are 16.67% for good success, 41.67% for partial success and also 41.67% for failure. Rates change with modifiers and these numbers make sense for PbtA games. Note that in either system: partial / mixed-success stays at a static rate throughout in the middle, the modifiers just expand the greater success and crunch down the failures.
With 5E, modifiers ramp up quickly with initial character stats and then crawl upwards with level gains. I decided on a distribution that resulted in 10% failure at a max of +11 (best possible stat bonus + proficiency). The numbers may seem harsh at their base: Just 5% for Grand Success, 30% for Mixed-Success and a whopping 65% Failure. I like the psychological effect of this, because players feel like they are beating the odds (with their modifiers doing the heavy lifting). Grand Success isn’t as hard as it seems. Even a poorly rolled level 1 character in 5E is likely to be using an attack roll with a modifier of +3 or more.
I also adjusted my players down a notch in proficiency, but this is not necessary. As a DM, play around with the proficiency bonuses if you want to mess with difficulty in your campaign.
Descending Dice, Ascending Dice, Countdown Dice, Boost Dice, Exploding Dice!
“Here, take these exploding dice.”
Dice mechanics have some nifty, ominous names. What the hell do all these mean and why do I bring them up? … Oh… wait first I should give the pitch…
The Pitch: Apparata Kitbash is a game for people who love rolling dice! For players who enjoy complexity but don’t want to spend game-time crunching numbers, looking up tables or digging through manuals. At least not at the table when you are playing the game.
Now that’s out of the way, what sort of dice mechanics will Apparata Kitbash use? I could shout “all of them!” but honestly I don’t just dump any mechanic into the game, even though it’s referred to as a kitbash. Maaaaybe most of these will get squeezed in, even if some are just assigned to a solitary spell.
Here are some that I am considering:
- This is just a phrase for players rolling dice and knowing what their results mean, without waiting for a back-and-forth response-loop from the GM.
Most often applied to to-hit rolls against a monster’s AC. This removes mystery, but it speeds up games considerably.
- If you roll the maximum side of a die, roll it again and add the totals together. Causes damage rolls to sometimes hit the stratosphere, especially with the effect stacking across multiple dice. A potentially compounded critical-roll.
I believe Savage Worlds and Open Legend (I haven’t played either, I admit) both use Exploding Dice. Also known as “Acing” dice or the “rule of 6”. Combat systems really need to be catered to it and you wouldn’t be able to apply 5E’s “bound accuracy” since numbers can go right off the chart. Must be exciting though, right?
I wouldn’t apply this to general combat or skill tests, but I may assign it specifically to suitable spells.
- You have a score written down and you roll (usually a d20) to increase that score. If your roll result is higher than what was previously written, you either increase the score by 1 or you adopt a new score with the dice result.
The score-increase-by-1 variation of this system is in The Black Hack, for increasing player stats each level-up and I am considering using it in a similar way. I have not yet decided whether to make base stats go up by 1 or by the dice result, nor have I decided how many attempts they would get per level (The Black Hack rolls all stats each level, but I would limit that). I’ll make a full post on this, once I’m ready to test it.
- This mechanic is used for items with a limited number of charges, or a durability for an item that might break. The item may have originally been marked with something like a d10 and when you use that item (a good example is a torch) you roll that die and if it comes up with a low result (usually 3 or less) then it has gone down in charges and you move to the next lower dice (a d8, then a d6, eventually last to a d4) for next time.
The idea here is to create tension, because rather than knowing the exact number of uses, it’s a chance to degrade. Also known as “Usage Dice” or “Risk Dice”. Again inspiration comes from The Black Hack and the author suggests using this system sparingly (too much tension breaks).
I am not sure if I will use Descending Dice at all, unless I wanted to make weapons run durability tests after combat. Hmm.
- A GM or player hands a die to another player, to assist with the total of their roll. It could be used on the spot, or saved until later. There are usually limits on how many of these dice can be held, often just one.
5E uses this mechanic for “Bardic Inspiration” and many DMs have house rules that DM-Inspiration also use a physical die (rather than Advantage, which is described below).
I love Boost Dice and I’ve already determined that for Apparata Kitbash I will be handing out a Boost Die every time a player critically fails (d20 natural-1), to offset the downsides of critical fumbles. Incoming article on this one soon.
Advantage / Disadvantage:
- Advantage: Roll two dice and take the higher die.
- Disadvantage: Roll two dice and take the lower die.
I love Advantage as well, it’s one of the best elements I would shameless use from 5E. The psychology on this is so strong, it feels so significant to roll two d20s. The math for Advantage / Disadvantage works out to +/- 3.325.
- A dice roll resolves in three possibilities: Full Success, Partial Success and Failure.
Apocalypse World popularized the idea of a partial success and I really enjoy it. In some games it feels a bit punishing though. Also known as Mixed Success. I will write a full post on this topic, but in a nutshell Apparata Kitbash will be using a d20 variation of this for combat rolls.
- This phrase is just about using a die to keep track of a score, either counting downwards or upwards. Many oversized d20s have their number-side placements in descending order to make this easier to do.
No idea if I’ll use this to track anything. Probably not, I prefer tokens, but I may make optional rules.
- Apply a modifier to a roll total, from either stats or a weapon-property (+2 Vorpal Sword).
This is a bog-standard system that almost every player expects in a tabletop RPG, but one that I will be trying my best to avoid for Apparata Kitbash. I would rather roll dice, add them together and that’s that. In most cases I will translate modifiers into additional dice.
Since I have mentioned games that have inspired me, I should list links. I do not claim any sort of endorsement from these:
- The Black Hack - by Peter Regan, is available on DMSGuild for just $2. It’s an OSR (Old-School Revival), attempting to capture that early first edition feeling. The entire OSR field is filled with innovative ideas.
- Apocalypse World - by Lumpley Games (David Vincent Baker), has spawned hundreds of other games “Powered by the Apocalypse”, including the very popular Dungeon World by Sage LaTorra and Adam Koebel.
- I mentioned Savage Worlds in relation to Exploding Dice and in Open Legend RPG “all dice explode”.
- And of course 5th Edition, which I’m sure you can find everywhere. =)
If you know of any other clever dice-related mechanics / resolutions, please do let me know! This is far from a comprehensive list. Also, it’s possible I’m not using all of my terminology exactly-correctly, so feel free to correct me. I can be contacted as @NecroRogIcon on Twitter.
... more posts ...