Skip to Content

Alternate Arkham Horror-type stat system?

14 replies [Last post]
Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010

I'm working on a speedy, exploring, action game. Here's the basics:

Touch of Evil type board: http://boardgamegeek.com/image/377574/a-touch-of-evil-the-supernatural-game
Enemies walk around the board similar to "The Adventurers".
Areas cause you to draw an event which test a skill much like "Arkham Horror".
Succeed at test rolling d6. Each 5/6 counts as 1 success. (this can change)
Complete 3 events to get a prize for that location.
Stats are Move, Sneak, Cunning and Brawn.

I don't know if I should add more. Maybe reflexes? But what would be the opposite? Intelligence? There WILL be 3 areas, so I would figure 1 area has more Move & Cunning while another has Sneak and Brawn. That leaves the third area...

The problem is: I can't figure out a good way to apply stats for which the tests will be made. I don't really want to use the Arkham Horror style of adjusting your stats every turn but that might be the only option. Maybe make unique characters which all have Min/Max stats of varying combinations which cannot be changed? If I do that, I could offset the poor stats by offering a second roll with another stat with increased difficulty. OR, they could just suck it up and wait until they're next turn to draw another card.

Any ideas on how to go about this?

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:The problem is: I can't

Quote:
The problem is: I can't figure out a good way to apply stats for which the tests will be made. I don't really want to use the Arkham Horror style of adjusting your stats every turn but that might be the only option.

I hat sliders In AH. Take a look at Eldritch Horror

----------------------------------

What are you actually looking for : Nb of stats? Any set between 2 to 9 stats could be OK. Here are some examples:

2: Body, Mind
3: Physical, Mental, Social
4: Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Cunning,
5: See Eldritch
6: See Arkham

Just make sure that each stats are used in average the same number of times.

Are you looking for type of rolls?

There are basically roll vs a TN and versus another roll. The TN can be set by the difficulty of the obstacle or it can be roll vs your own skill.

Are you looking for a type of dice roll?

You need to determine how many variables will influence the dice system. Some system like roll 1D +X only allow the use of 1 variable to the system. But other system like Arkham which is Roll X D, Where Y dice are greater than Z, then you have 3 variables in the system.

Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010
I am actually looking for a

I am actually looking for a way to not completely screw players when they deal with an event they are bad at. Either

A) I use the Arkham Horror adjust-your-stats mechanic.
B) Keep players' stats static. This is the "tough luck" approach.
C)???

I don't understand how to apply "roll vs your own skill"

Most likely it's going to be roll vs the number set by the event card.
Dice rolling is X dice, Y result, vs Z event number.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:I am actually looking

Quote:
I am actually looking for a way to not completely screw players when they deal with an event they are bad at. Either

A) I use the Arkham Horror adjust-your-stats mechanic.
B) Keep players' stats static. This is the "tough luck" approach.
C)???

Why not have a pool of energy (willpower or other) that refills once a while and that allows you to spend in order to get a reroll or increase your stats temporarily.

In a dungeon quest variant of mine, I made a nice twist with the determination token. In the original rules, each time you failed a roll, you got a determination token to try again on your next roll. In my variant, you kept those tokens and you could gain tokens as EXP for defeating monsters.

Now when you failed a roll, you could spend these tokens to increase your stat temprarily and succeed. But somettimes the roll is way too far ahead and it would cost too much points. So it' just better to fail your roll, get an extra point and try again later.

You could have a will power poll to increase your roll or your stat after the roll in order to pass the check. So players has to decide if they want to spend their points now or wait for later. Or does it worth it to spend a lot of points to pass this check. So there is a sort of evaluation of the consequences and management of resources.

Quote:
I don't understand how to apply "roll vs your own skill"

Simple, Roll 1D20, below your stat to succeed. A typical D&D roll. In that case, the event does not inflence the roll. If you have a stat of 15, then you have 75% chance of success what ever the event. Still, D&D introduce modifiers as an event variable.

Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010
ahhh. now I see. roll vs

ahhh. now I see. roll vs skill makes sense now.

Your determination token sounds really cool. That really helps players out. Unfortunately, I have decided (until playtesting has been done) to keep it character stats static and create characters that give a reason why they have the stats they have. I think I'm feeling a little evil. I starting to want to have them fail a lot now. hahaha.

I DO thank you for your input. It was really insightful!!

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
If stats are static with no

If stats are static with no power up options, then you need to give players choice elsewhere. So for example, a bit like in Elder Sign where they could chose their mission by evaluating which mission they think they could succeed.

But if they need to face random event, since they cannot chose their challenge, then they are stuck with the result of luck without any decisions possible.

I do suggest you let players have some decision, it's up to you to decide where those decisions will take place.

RGaffney
RGaffney's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/26/2011
Ok so this is big thinking,

Ok so this is big thinking, and I try to encourage Game Designers to think smaller and streamline. But it would be SO COOL if there were multiple ways to accomplish everything. Preferably if you could accomplish virtually everything in all the ways if you had a high enough skill.

Ok so there is a skeleton, you have to fight it, your brawn is low, you lose. But what if you didn't? What if you could sneak around the back of it and assassinate it? What if you could trick it into fighting another player with your cunning? What if you could slide between it's legs and get away? It would just be harder, or take longer than the optimal way to handle the challenge.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
That works well in RPG,

That works well in RPG, because you ask players to be creative and find an alternate solution to a problem that they excel better at.

But in a board game, if you offer multiple options against an obstacle, you get stuck with an obvious choice. If for example for a character:

Choice A requires you to roll 3 or less on 1 D 6
Choice B requires you to roll 5 or less on 1D6

Then the player will chose B all the time. Other players might chose differently if they have different stats.

One mechanics similar that I have again used in the Dungeon quest variant is that during a challenge, you roll 2 dice of different colors where the colors match 2 of your character stats.

You compare the rolls against your character stats, and each roll < stat is a success. Making it possible to roll between 0 an 2 success per roll.

Now the twist is that characters had 4 stats, and 2 of them are tested each time. But the probability to face a challenge where boths stats are bad are pretty limited. Most of the time, one of the challenged stat will be better than the other. Giving characters a chance to score a hit each roll.

So the character somehow has 2 ways to deal with it since he is challenged for 2 different attributes. And according to the stat configuration, some characters will be better and will rarely be defenseless. It's a neat mechanic I intend to reuse for all my adventure games.

Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010
the game takes 1 hour.

RGaffney wrote:
Ok so there is a skeleton, you have to fight it, your brawn is low, you lose. But what if you didn't? What if you could sneak around the back of it and assassinate it? What if you could trick it into fighting another player with your cunning? What if you could slide between it's legs and get away? It would just be harder, or take longer than the optimal way to handle the challenge.

The game I'm making is going to take 1 hour to play, which is why I'm keeping the stats static. The move options people have, the longer it's going to take. As it stands, players have to beat 3 events at 3 locations.I'm thinking of the computer game "God Save the Queen" now.
(Assuming I'm using "5/6 = 1 success")

Event: Skeleton
Stat: Brawn 2
Save: Move 2
Victory: Take this card as a completed event.
Defeat: Lose 1 Health

The Skeleton requires 2 successes in Brawn to defeat it. You have weak Brawn but try anyway. You fail. Roll SAVE to avoid defeat. This way, you have a chance to survive. Originally, If you failed, the initial roll, you immediately failed.
-------------------
the other option is:

Event: Skeleton
Plan A: Brawn 2
Plan B: Cunning 3
Victory: Take this card as a completed event.
Defeat: Lose 1 Health

In this case, you MUST use Plan A to defeat the Skeleton. If you fail Plan A, you are defeated. You may now choose to attempt Plan B. This is your alternate, "harder" method of defeating the event. If you fail this plan, you suffer the same defeat status and the event is ended. Plan B is "harder" because you have to roll more successes but you should, possibly, have more dice in that other stat.

I eliminated most of the player's options for choice which eats up time. Option 2 just gives the option of a second shot. I'm hoping, if the 2nd format is chosen, choosing doesn't eat up time.

RGaffney
RGaffney's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/26/2011
Sounds good. And Larianna.

Sounds good.

And Larianna. Yes indeed. There would have to be something else at to make using alternate skills "harder" other than a less probable die roll. like a resource cost

Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010
RGaffney wrote:Sounds

RGaffney wrote:
Sounds good.

Which one sounds good? lol.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Your idea reminds me of the

Your idea reminds me of the old version of dungeon quest. When a monster was encountered, you had the choice to:

Attack
Retreat
Wait and see

Each choice lead to different results according to the cards. But since there was multiple cards of the same events, you could not predict what was the best choice (since the outcome is not shown to the player)

So you could have the same event in 2 or 3 copies with a set of actions and a different outcome according to the action chosen. Draw the cards, ask what the player wants to do like in a "The reader is the hero book" and resolve the outcome.

Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010
I really like the idea of

I really like the idea of reading the card to the player like a RPG. Then you could say what stat you need to roll with but not the number needed, then read off a victory or defeat flavor text. That would be really cool but it DOES take up more time for one thing. I especially like the idea of save event with different requirements just to change things up.

The problem is, I don't have a "Retreat" or "Wait and See" option. How would that be implemented? When it comes down to it, both of those sound like a wasted turn or lost turn. Fortune favors the bold in my game. I HAS to be played in an hour.

RGaffney
RGaffney's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/26/2011
I liked the plan a plan b

I liked the plan a plan b version. They both seemed similar to me and like relevant contextualizations of my abstract idea to your particular game.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:The problem is, I don't

Quote:
The problem is, I don't have a "Retreat" or "Wait and See" option. How would that be implemented? When it comes down to it, both of those sound like a wasted turn or lost turn. Fortune favors the bold in my game. I HAS to be played in an hour.

Each card could have a list of 2-3 choice like in an RPG book. For example:

You enter a sleeping dragons room, fo you:

A- Try to stab the dragon and hope to kill it instantly.
B- Search the treasure room for the item you are looking for
C- Sneak though the room to reach the opposing door.
(the text could be shorter)

You don't tell the players the outcome of the encounter yet. Then when they chose, you could now say what to roll or what happens like in:

A- Make a combat check, inflict that many wound and proceed to battle.
B- Make a sneak check to avoid wake up the dragon, your item is not there.
C- Make a sneak check to avid waking up the dragon.

On another card, choice B could make you find something in the end.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut