Posts

Progressing Abilities from Focuses

Image
TLDR; Improve progression relationship between focuses and ability using the table below. Add up all the focus bonuses within an ability. An ability score bonus is derived from that total and that is added on top of your starting ability scores. Right now in AGE, progression in ability scores and focuses are independent. It seems that you might have some relationship between the two. A high specific skill would likely lead to a decent general skill, but not the other way around. What simple rule could describe such a relationship? I have in the past experimented with an ability first approach that acts as a constraint to the number of focuses but what if we derive an ability score from focuses? A good formula is the sum of integers which is a quadratic formula. We will use the total of all focuses in the ability as the total and then solve for what integer would give that total sum. Here is a table of the number of total focus bonus for a derived ability score.   This looks like a gre
Post a Comment
Read more

Equivalent Dice for AGE

Image
  The test roll for the "Adventure Game Engine" is 3d6. I was experimenting with some math and realized the TN 10,11,12 probability chance lines up perfectly with 1d8 die with TN 3,4,5. Therefore you could realistically switch from 3d6 to 1d8+6 without changes to any system numbers. Yes you lose the opportunity to roll doubles but for this thought experiment we are OK with that. There are few main advantages for 1d8+6 over 3d6. The first is a single die which is easier to do math with and does not have a curved probability distribution (it's a straight line). The second is that it maintains a compact rolling range which won't feel as swingy as d20 does. The plus six makes a firm foundation such that the average of the roll is only 50% of the base. Compared to d20 where a modifier of plus 1 is only 9% of the overall roll value. A plus one here is more like a +7 which is 60% of the roll value. So much less of the overall roll value is random. The third advantage is that
Post a Comment
Read more

Precise Table of Advanced Tests

Image
Advanced tests are not advanced enough. The best case is that there are a few rules of thumb in the rule book but they do not take into account a number of critical factors. First factor is the absence of "difficulty" related to the target number and only relying on threshold to convey loose adjective of difficulty. "Average" and "Formidable" are not sufficient and instead target numbers and number or rolls or rounds needs to be established. Second factor is the suggestion that for each roll in an advanced test that you can design about 3 degrees of success. This is inaccurate as explained in a previous blog post - adventure-game-engine-stunt-die-and-advanced-tests . Due to the correlation between overall success and the stunt die you get smaller average successes with easy tests and larger average successes with hard tests. This is offset a bit as the hard tests fail more often. However the rules prescribe the number 3 regardless of target number. A TN 9
Post a Comment
Read more

Advanced Tests in the Revised Action Model

In  start-of-new-action-model-for-age-in.html  we have TN = 6 + Value/2 as method for balancing a target number and the value (or MP) of a spell or action. How can we use that in redesigning advanced tests? An advanced test in AGE is when the results of more than one roll added together in a sequence. These are used when a test maybe taken over a period of time. Something like scaling a mountain may be implemented as several tests rather than just one but harder test. The current rules use the stunt die as the value you are adding together. A single 1d6 has a value of 3.5, but is that more like damage or more like increment TN? I think it better fits the TN description. Additionally if you think about the the lower bound of TN 6, adding the stunt die basically gets you to the standard TN 10 action anyway. Let's use the definition that for an advanced test you are adding the stunt die and getting sum of those particular TNs. That leave a 2d6 base die plus 1d6 stunt die. Thinking abo
Post a Comment
Read more

A Foundation for Talents and Specializations

Talents (and specializations) in AGE need some work. They do not have a discernable formula between requirements and ranks (novice, expert, master, etc) and each benefit value. Starting off from  start-of-new-action-model-for-age  definition of actions and TN design, we can build a pattern for talents and specializations. Talents, Target Numbers, and Requirements A talent will generally be a new action or a bonus to an existing action. For a talent with a bonus we propose that the bonus is based on  stat-equivalencies  and that these raise the TN of the base action. The amount of equivalent TN the bonus adds is the requirement. If a talent does not add a bonus and instead just another action then no bonus is required nor a requirement. The requirement can use an ability score or a focus or both. Use the total as the TN bonus being applied to the talent. One ability and one focus would equal a bonus TN of 3 Talent Advancement Talents have at least three tiers or ranks (more in other AGE
Post a Comment
Read more

Stat Equivalencies in Fantasy AGE for Spell or Action Design

 The following are equivalent and can be used to convert between each other. 1 MP (mana point) 2 SP (stunt point) 2 TN (target number) (Note: this is used incrementally and is not the base) 4 HP (health point) 1 minor action 0.5 major action 10 yards (measure of distance) All of those equivalencies can be worked out using basic action and stunts. 1 MP = 2 SP, from Skillful Casting stunt 2 SP = 2 TN, from Powerful Casting stunt 2 SP = 4 HP, from Healing Power stunt 0.5 major action = 2 TN, from Defend major action 1 minor action = 0.5 major action, comparing move versus run 1 minor action = 10 yards, using move with zero stats or ancestry is 10 1 major action = TN 10 at 2 MP using Healing Touch (2MP) which is 2d6 1 major action = 4SP, from Healing Touch being average 7HP which divided by two and rounded up for SP cost is 3.5 => 4SP 1 minor action = 2SP, from 1 minor action = 0.5 major action The minor action here is a little stronger than many of the minors actions in the rules. Aim,
Post a Comment
Read more

Start of a New Action Model for AGE in 2024

 I have taken a data approach to reverse engineering the AGE action model in two articles so far: https://herdingdice.blogspot.com/2023/07/decoding-mp-from-spell-descriptions.html https://herdingdice.blogspot.com/2023/07/decoding-age-action-economy.html I learned some valuable lessons but afterwards I wasn't happy with the formulas fundamentally.  Why is the TN base a 9? Why use an MP to TN ratio of 3.5 to 2, or 1.75 to 1? TLDR; Summary 2HP = 1SP added to the equivalency formulas. This will keep the Mighty Blow stunt at a cost of 2SP, but will reduce Lethal Blow stunt to 4SP and allow a new stunt, let's call it Crushing Blow, at a cost of 6SP Using TN 10/2MP/2d6 basic spell we can count backwards to find a new base TN for a spell. This turns out to be TN 6 since you take away 4 TN = 4SP = 2MP worth of value The Reasoning  My solution ended up questioning the usefulness of MP as a resource. I have been looking into Fortune in Fantasy AGE and it as a resource matches 1 to 1 with
Post a Comment
Read more