Contents
Plundering the Seas of Probability
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Video Game Watchdog National Institute On Media And The Family Shutting Down [11]
 
Modern Warfare 2 Infinity Ward's 'Most Successful PC Version' Yet [12]
 
New Tech, Design Details Of Project Natal To Emerge At Gamefest In February
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Texture Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
3D Environment Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Network Programmer
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Character Artist
 
Sony Online Entertainment
Brand Manager
 
Monolith Productions
Sr. Software Engineer, Engine - Monolith Productions - #113767
 
Crystal Dynamics
Sr. Level Designer
 
Gargantuan Studios
Technical Art Director
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
arrow Upping The Craft: Susan O'Connor On Games Writing [6]
 
arrow Small Developers: Minimizing Risks in Large Productions - Part II [6]
 
arrow iPhone Piracy: The Inside Story [48]
 
arrow And Yet It Grows: Analyzing the Size and Growth of the European Game Market [5]
 
arrow NPD: Behind the Numbers, October 2009 [13]
 
arrow Reflecting On Uncharted 2: How They Did It [5]
 
arrow Sponsored Feature: Rasterization on Larrabee -- Adaptive Rasterization Helps Boost Efficiency
 
arrow Postmortem: Wadjet Eye's The Blackwell Convergence [2]
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Time Fcuk
 
Accepting the Inherent Value of Games
 
Planckogenesis, Part II: Song Structure & Gravy Train [1]
spacer
About
spacer News Director:
Leigh Alexander
Features Director:
Christian Nutt
Editor At Large:
Chris Remo
Advertising:
John 'Malik' Watson
Recruitment/Education:
Gina Gross
 
Features
  Plundering the Seas of Probability
by Tyler Sigman
3 comments
Share RSS
 
 
January 22, 2008 Article Start Previous Page 2 of 5 Next
 

What this Article is, in Fact, About

The most unique parts of the Longship game design are the dynamic weather system mechanics and the CargoMaster mechanics. By freak happenstance, these also happen to be the most enjoyable parts (according to playtester reviews, not just my random opining). But this Gamasutra feature isn't about either of those. Why? Because, that's why.

Instead, this feature is about the dice-based mechanics in Longship, which make up a small but important part of the game. See, I recently retooled Longship to use custom dice instead of straight d6s, so I thought I'd explain some of the design decisions and math behind the new mechanics that are associated with the dice. Like I stated up front, I really want to show some applied probability theory to prove that it is useful in more situations than just bombastic talks at the Cigars and Brandy Club for Designers.

Advertisement

In some past versions of Longship, it used many more dice, but currently the game uses only two six-sided dice. Crude or sloppy dice mechanics are a hallmark of AMERITRASH design, so once the rest of the game was working fairly well, I decided to take another pass on the dice-related mechanics and give them more polish and personality.

Although I toyed with the idea of removing dice altogether, they have an important role to play in the game. First of all, randomization to some degree can be a very good thing. Some games are superb without it (Chess, Go) but games for a family setting and range of skill levels benefit from some chance. We've seen this in the American classics Monopoly and Risk, but randomness plays an important role in Eurostyle games as well (which I love). Settlers has the all-important (and sometimes detested) 2d6, Carcassonne has the random tile-flipping, Ticket to Ride has card draws and route draws, and so on.

The Not So Grand Game of Goose

The Game of Goose

The degree of randomness is often what throws games firmly into one design camp or another (Ameritrash or Eurostyle). Subject for another article, but long story short is that too much randomness destroys the meaning of choice in the game, and that's a bad, bad thing for most designers and players alike. While the "GRAND GAME OF GOOSE" was interesting in its day, games like that are just not up to snuff two centuries later. Chutes and Ladders does have its places, I suppose.

 

 

Two Dice, How Do We Love Thee? 36 Ways, Says I...

2d6 (or two six-sided dice) based mechanics are familiar, flexible, tunable, and all sorts of super things. They are great game tools.

The World Famous 2d6

Familiar: people are used to rolling two six-side dice and don't find it strange at all. Thank Monopoly. Other polyhedrons have an RPG-inspired stigma.

Flexible and Tunable: with 2d6, you can achieve a lot of different number distributions and mechanics. You can use each dice individually, combine them together to get numbers (e.g. Craps), or use one die as tens and the other as ones. If combining them, which is of course quite common, then the probability spread of the numbers 2 though 12 gives you a lot of flexibility to work with. There are 36 different combinations of the dice, so you can make events as rare as 1/36 (2.8%) or as common as you want (by allowing spreads of numbers... e.g. "You succeed on a 3 or above on two dice (97.2%)."

For Longship, though, I wanted something a little more special. Design-wise, there are times when other dice (d4, d8, d10, whatever) are needed to achieve whatever probability or mechanic you are aiming for. When choosing other dice, though, you run the risk of alienating players and/or attaching a strong stigma to the game. Sometimes anything other than a d6 screams D&D to people, which can be bad. Poor polyhedrons, always getting a bad rap.

Before you scream "Stop talking about dice, I'm a digital designer, curse you!", remember that you face a similar crisis of familiarity when coding events related to a random number generator. Sure, you can use percentage-based systems or get as complex as you want in the code, but where user interface is involved, you must still consider familiarity issues. I personally love percentage based systems, but we still see tons of video games with d6ish, d8ish, or d20ish mechanics, and that's partially why.

Returning to our heroic yarn, I wanted a good randomizer with the flexibility of 2d6 but I didn't want to go with a tile deck or card draw or a spinner or some other mechanism that basically screams "I'm dice but I look so much more sophisticated, don't I?" In truth, I needed what 2d6 had to offer but wanted to add a little more theme and interest. Enter custom d6s. After a bit of work, I settled on the following:

 
Article Start Previous Page 2 of 5 Next
 
Comments

Robert Baxter
profile image
This is a great statistical breakdown, and makes me want to re-evaluate the probability models for games like Doom, Descent, and Mutant Chronicles.

All of the games I mention use probability and custom cut dice combinations to evoke a specific model of probabilities for weapon and ability differentiation.

Do you find that the decision for using custom cut dice was more a matter of making your game unique, or was it to map the probabilities in a more grokkable fashion for the player?

Diego R. Pons
profile image
I find it surprising that still needs to be remarked why articles like this are being posted in this site.
Awareness of how game mechanics work at their core is what true game design is all about.

And as a player, even though in a lot of games users are not aware of how probability is involved; there's still a lot of gamers like myself that enjoy clear feedback of probability components and the action of throwing digital dice whatever the shape this takes.

Tyler Sigman
profile image
Thanks for the comments. Robert, re: your question: it was a mix of the reasons you stated.

First, it adds a little more personality to the game. It's a little more fun to check for axes and sea monsters than just a check things like "4 or above on d6". Goes with the theme better.

Second, the symbols are a bit more grokkable, as you've pointed out. I'm hoping the rules are more memorable, and less checking of reference tables will be required. Rolling two dice and checking for sea monsters when passing through a Sea Monster-inhabited sea zone maps well to memory (in theory).

Some of the combos I found I needed to do just made more sense with the symbols, whereas they seemed really clumsy with straight d6s. For example, the raiding rules: checking for axes and taking casualties on sea monsters is sorta simple, whereas "5-6 equals 1 success, 6 = two successes, and a roll of 2-3 is a casualty" is just a little more of a mouthful.

Of course, I'm just using normal d6s to prototype.

I'm not saying that custom dice are categorically better; but I like the theme-ey-ness.


none
 
Comment:
 


Submit Comment