"Buckets of Dice Replacement Chart" Topic

If you read the post below and want a copy of the file send an email to mark@scalecreep.com

I like some games that use buckets of dice, but I actually hate the dice part. They get everywhere. I've heard of dice towers, box lids, dice trays….it's like herding cats. You end up with dice all over the table. Ruins the illusion for me.

So I just finished a project I started a while ago. It is an Excel file that converts your standard "hit on a 5+" type mechanic with roll 2D6 like decimal dice, generating results from 11 to 66.

The chart is pretty big but I'm making a "slider" to make it easy to read.

Here's how it works: the columns are "dice thrown" from 5 to 25 (for 5 dice or less, roll dice). This is Rate of Fire in Flames of War. It might be weapon strength in some other rules, or the number of figures in the unit.

For each column there are 4 sub-columns, one for Hit on 3+, Hit on 4+, Hit on 5+ and Hit on 6.

The rows are the 2D6 – from 11 to 66 – results. Cross reference to get the number of hits.

Example:

My HMG platoon is firing 18 dice at your troops, and hit on a 5+. I roll a red D6 (tens) and a white D6 (ones) scoring a 4 and a 2 respectively. I cross reference 42 with the 18/5+ column and it yields a 6. I have scored 6 hits.

Your platoon saves on a 5+. You need to make 6 saves so you repeat the process using the 6/5+ column. Rolling the 2D6 you score a 35. Cross referencing yields a 2. You made 2 saves and took 4 hits.

The chart is designed for the GM to use, not the players. My plan is to glue it to posterboard, and make a sliding piece that allows you to select the appropriate column. The slider will have the 11-66 along one side. I think it will be faster than even counting up 18 dice let alone rolling them, sorting out the 5+ and then repeating for saves.

Than again, I prefer charts to dice, so this is not for everybody.

I may even get a nice laser cut MDF "slider" contraption made. Call me crazy.

The odds are not the same as rolling dice. The Excel file used to calculate the odds "compresses" the results to the middle. So with 25 dice hitting on a 4+ you will score between 7 and 18 hits. While you can't get 25 hits, you also can't get 0 hits. (The 11-66 breaks the chances down in to 2.77% increments. The tail of the curve for dice rolls is often much, much smaller, so I round off). I think so long as both sides use the chart it will greatly speed up play and make the games better looking.

You're making a bucket-o-dice slide rule? Cool! Sounds like something Litko could make look pretty sweet. For myself, I'd probably go with a dice roller app on my phone instead, but it's still a cool idea.

Also, did you intentionally go for a distribution weighted towards the center, or is it a functional limitation of using 2d6 as decimal dice? If the latter, would using 2d10 instead not have given you more room, so to speak?

Doug

Yes I could have gone 2D10 for a marginal improvement in the chart. But then I have to use D10 and D6. This lets me create a dice box with 5 dice: 1 red and 4 white. So either you read the decimal D6 or you read them as normal. So now all the dice are in a box.

A dice roller app takes away the fun of rolling dice. And with a phone I'm all thumbs. Tho you could easily write a look up formula on this file and just type in the data still using the 2D6….

Here are a couple pictures of a simple paper mock up. First is the complete chart:

Close up of the "slide:"

That is pretty cool. I can see it's use as a GM.

Matthew

Mark,

I once tried something like this and as an intellectual exercise it was fascinating.

But in testing various approaches to gamer experience I found that the lag from die roll to chart reference to result can "kill the buzz" or drama of a die roll.

There's something exciting about having a target number in mind, rolling a die or some dice, and then seeing the immediate result as the die/dice comes to rest. You get that visceral "Yeah Baby!!!" or "gosh darn it!!!" moment with an immediate result whether going for that single 5+ morale roll to hold or spraying 6 dice of SMG fire for 3+.

And while I agree that large numbers of dice can get messy I've also noticed that most players really enjoy the tangible link between rolling a number of dice and an in-game action. So my ATGM or sniper shot is just one die that zeros in on its target while my barrage of LMG fire or swarm of tiny alien monsters is 12 dice that swamps the enemy. With one or two die resolution for such rolls you lose that connection between the player experience and the game's action.

Nice execution of the chart. If you wanted to get REALLY fancy, you could put it on a cylinder, with the viewing sleeve as an outer cylinder. As for the phone app, it's handy to have around, but you're right; it does take away the fun of rolling the dice. Then again, I suppose it's all a matter of your threshold; at what number of dice does it stop being fun?

For me, that number is pretty high, but I cheat. The system on which I'm working uses a fixed target number (4+) on each die, and only the number of dice in the pool changes. For variation, there can be an opposing pool, with each success in the opposing pool cancelling one success in the acting pool. Not, by any means, a new idea, but one I'm finding quite practical and flexible. I also like the way the distributions shape up.

I've recently found that the Ludus Gladiatorious dice, which have swords (one or two, depending on which type) on three faces and shields (again, one or two) are ideal for this, as you don't even have to count pips. There are also +/- and 1/0 dice out there (sold or math games) that would work well for the same purpose.

But that's not really applicable when you have a set of rules with which you're already working, as you appear to be.

Doug

With one or two die resolution for such rolls you lose that connection between the player experience and the game's action.

But it would do several things.

First it will stop the need to be rolling 40+ dice for certain combats.

Second it will speed up the game.

Third it will balance out the game.

Though I would agree that using D10's would be better.

Well, I like rolling buckets of dice.

This is going to be used for my "Flames of Epic" game this fall (Flames of Epic is Flames of War in half scale, on a 6x8 table).

My take on rolling dice is this: players like to have a chance at creating a story. So whether you get the great shot with 36 dice or two, crap out on one die or 19, the fun of dice is about (a) feeling like you did something (i.e. rolled high or low) and (b) the luck helping create those storied moments you'll remember, long after you've forgotten the rules, the scenario and who else was there.

As for "kill the buzz" I've watched games with bucket of dice. Ever time how long it takes to gather 28 dice? Roll them? Count the hits? Then repeat for the 13 saves?

When I hear gamers complain that charts are slower than buckets, I find it is often poor chart design that is the real culprit! But that's another thread…

As a guy who has done simulation for a living and know a little something about probability and statistics, I think what he did is quite clever.

Extra Crispy, try the Look, Sarge, No Charts rules. They have no chart cards (so there's no poor chart design) and no buckets of dice. (Shameless plug.) You make a handful of special dice, put some labels on the bases (or built out a short roster with unit stats), and just play the game.

Buck Surdu

Buck:

I have them, thanks (tho with over 500 rule sets in the collection to date, I almost always have them!). Played them once at a con. Interesting concepts…