One Roll Engine (ORE)

Have you read up on ORE? I provides two statistics in a single roll (*Tuple magnitude and numeric magnitude. Needs a chart on how many success you can expect, given X dice, though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Roll_Engine

Hit Locations and Called Shot Criticals

Keith J Davies 

.... hit locations instead of straight random multiplier for damage, and armor coverage

Matt Miller

Hit locations are always a tempting location, but it certainly adds complexity. You roll to hit, roll for hit location, then roll for damage. It adds a fair bit of complexity, because different locations then have different armor values. The bad ones go like this: Attack, Roll for Location, Lookup Location, Lookup AC, Roll for Hit, Roll for damage, Add damage multiplers.

The Skill and Powers 'Called Shot Criticals' did it better, where you chose a location, with harder to hit locations getting a penalty to attack. Then you rolled severity, (based on weapon size) and then got a damage multiplier, and some extra effects. For example, a called shot critical to the head was at -8, but a severity of 10 could mean instant death. Rob ran a campaign where villains kept forgetting their helmets, so a character if AC -5 had a head with an AC 10 (effective AC 2), meaning several significant enemies were one-shotted by being beheaded. It was glorious!...One of the things that people really like is being able to say "I am a cut at his head". Yet the CSC penalty to hit made sure it wasn't something you wanted to do all the time

In fairness, they were supposed to fail a saving throw vs. death as defense against a critical, but we frequently neglected that rule, because it was so much fun. Were it mine to design again, I'd do it like this: Choose a location, with different locations getting a bonus to AC. And then different locations have a different damage dice, damage multiplier, or bonus damage attached.

Keith J Davies 

DnD 3e also had percentage checks for things where character ability and circumstance (mostly) didn't change things. For instance, miss chance due to concealment (20%/50%... unless you had a feat or something that changed it; BAB and high ability scores didn't improve it). Still almost always in steps of 5%, but the percentile roll meant you don't add modifiers.

Matt Miller

The cover/concealment thing was weird, but I think they included that for reasons of spells. A +10 to AC is not the same as a 50% miss chance, which stacks with AC and makes it harder. The sequential filter is nice, as it makes concealment hurt both the characters with low and high BAB equally

Keith J Davies 

I'd say the two rules interact, rather than 'stack'.... If they stacked, though, it should be 0% chance to hit.... The net effect is similar (decreased chance of being hit), but it's not the same thing (there are attacks that ignore AC but not concealment...)

Dnd Complexity Over Time

Matt Miller

• DnD was most complicated  at 2E (AD&D), where there were different mechanics for: attacks, profiencies, saving throws, thief skills, cleric abilities, spells, ranger abililities, fighter extraordinary strength, fighter weapon specialization: Every class basically had a unique mechanic. XP also varied by class, making multi and dual classing a pain. 

• Dnd 3.0 really cut down on that, converting almost everything to one of two mechanics: d20 (Attacks, saves, thief skills, cleric turning) or to feats (ranger abilities, weapon specialization). Only spells remained outside that context. XP per class was standardized.

• Numinara, Monte Cook's take on an advancement from 3E, went simpler, with a single mechanic to manage everything. Strangely, I really don't like it for just that reason--the game has no 'depth'. Once you've mastered the up-front complexity, there isn't anything new to try--just things to optimize 

• 4th was an attempt to implement World of Warcraft as a table-top game. My recollection is that it implemented everything as 'powers' with per day, per session, and per encounter frequency. Powers were also active, passive, conditional, and triggered. Powers were packaged as part of abilities. Spells were still distinct, but there was extensive use of meta-magic powers to alter spells. Character creation seemed to be a bit of a hassle. 

On reflection, the complication of DnD 2.0 was  actually a good thing. There was more game to play, as every class had a special set of mechanics you could explore. It did make dual-classing or multi-classing a pain.

TIERS OF CRUNCH

Matt Miller

How many rolls, calculations, and look-ups does it take to resolve an normal action? 

(And thus how long does a 'round' of battle take?)

~~~~~~~~~~~TIER 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dangerous Journeys
Phoenix Command
Mythus (?)
~~~~~~~~~~~TIER 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rolemaster
Powers& Perils
ShadowRun (FASA)
GURPS 3E(?)
HERO?
Warhammer(?)
~~~~~~~~~~~TIER 3~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GURPS 4e
ShadowRun 4th Edition
DND 4e
D&D 5e
Warhammer 40K 6E
Mayhem
DnD: Skills and Powers
DnD 4E
GURPS 4E
Pathfinder
DnD 3.5
DnD 5E
DnD, Advanced (2E)
Savage Worlds
DnD 1E
~~~~~~~~~~~TIER 4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fate: Dresden Files
One-Roll Engine (?)
D6
HARP
Rules Cyclopedia D&D
Tunnels and Trolls
~~~~~~~~~~~TIER 5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FUDGE/Fate
Numinara?
Tri-Stat
Amber Diceless (?)

Owen Wylde

it depends on how much realism/believability we want. The old "initiative, hit, damage, see if still standing" suits some, but others want to work out tactics, work out ranges, add obscure modifiers from books out of print and from obscure web references, check out and interpret effect of actions, use various moves, then attack, work out effect, minus defences, etc.

Dalton Calford 

....some systems can be EXTREMELY CRUNCHY while also being able to be VERY ABSTRACT.For example, Tunnels and Trolls. You can have character by character detailed combat with strategic rolls for manoeuvring, special abilities, ranged and magical combat, or, you can fight out a battle between a million foes to a side with a single die roll, all using the same mechanics......Traveller, over the years, has been comprised of many mini-games that come together into a single system. Even Character generation with it's character death element, becomes a separate standalone game. World development or ship design became as important to the overall gaming experience as actual rpg game play. Gurps, on the other hand, which gives you all the same detail, does not seem to spur on the imagination as much as traveller does. In many ways, producing the exact same material with Gurps as Traveller, is considered a chore instead of fun. 

Encounter Manual

Matt Miller

In DnD, most XP comes from defeating monsters in combat. Making combat the main source of XP may not have been intended. But good tables on appropriate amounts of XP are available for combat, and none for other types of encounters. People respond to incentives. This suggests we need charts for different types of encounters-- a 'monster manual' for non-combat encounters, that includes appropriate XP.

Rob Hicks

I've never used wandering monster charts. I prefer to use lists that are based on environment, or theme them for the dungeon. Random encounters are done better through video games and don't tell much of a story....I bet fourth has charts out there, but if not, you could use 3e or pathfinder charts easily enough. 

Nathan Dowdell

Functionally, random encounters are a part of a different style of play than 4e supports. 4e encounters are very much of the "set piece action movie" style, which makes random, spontaneous conflicts difficult to deal with (the best 4e encounters are ones the GM has had time to plan and prepare, with interesting environments and challenging opponents).

Ed Vaughan 

Wandering monster charts work well in 4e, assuming you aren't hand-waving exploration. Often 4e adventures assume you walk to the next dungeon or room of guys without incident, and as a result the dungeons can feel small, pre-generated and mechanical. The other thing that's different about 4e adventures is that encounters are usually balanced around the party, where random encounter tables usually don't cater towards any particular level PC.  

Ken St. Andre 

There is no reason not to build Wandering Monster charts based on environment. A dungeon is a pretty generic environment--you can put almost anything inside it. A swamp or a forest offers a diverse habitat where dozens of creatures/foes could appear.

Ed Vaughan

Making a wandering monster table is really easy... Just pick any number of your favorite monsters and make a table out of it...then, decide how frequently they will occur... 5th edition uses 17-20 on a d20. Older D&D versions used a roll of 1 on a d10, or a roll of 1 in 6. Frequency is all up to you -- the more frequent monsters appear, the more difficult things are for the party.

Nathan Dowdell

Random encounters really have their origin - and find their purpose most strongly - in the earliest versions of D&D, back when you got XP equal to gold recovered, rather than getting XP for monsters killed. By focussing all reward on treasure, the idea of avoiding encounters (because encounters could mean casualties, which lessens your ability to succeed) through stealth, guile, diplomacy, or deception becomes important. Encumbrance also matters here - the more you carry, the slower you travel, and the more chance of random encounters... which are a risk, rather than another source of XP, but the less you carry, the less XP you get at the end. In that context, XP-for-Gold, Encumbrance, and Random Encounters are three parts of a mechanical construct that encourages cunning over brute force, and self-preservation over battlefield glory.
In that context, XP-for-Gold, Encumbrance, and Random Encounters are three parts of a mechanical construct that encourages cunning over brute force, and self-preservation over battlefield glory.
Random encounters serve less of a purpose outside of that context, becoming more an element of worldbuilding for sandbox-style play (with different tables for different environments) instead of a hazard to force logistical considerations. 

Ed Vaughan

If a player's expectation is similar to an adventure like Dungeon Delve, or Keep on the Shadowfell, they may not have any experience with exploration and resource management. The hardest part will be introducing the game style to the players -- that the PCs move only their speed per round, and have to cover the space between before they get to those labeled encounter areas. The longer they dawdle the more potential for random monsters there are.

Paul Goldstone 

I always felt wandering monsters were more work. 'Where did they come from?', players trying to track them to origin, just added a lot of faff.....However if you are playing a free form travelling with no purpose type game...there are millions of tables from all the editions. 

Matt Miller 

For outside environments, when players are 'on the road', wandering encounters make more sense. But you can't do the same time/space compaction in a dungeon...so you have to generate tension through spot checks and perception.

Mission/Goal based Role Playing

Cory Magel 

The group I play with most regularly moved to mission/goal based exp.....

Matt Miller

The idea of a 'mission' supports the metaphor of role-playing as 'squad tactical combat', with declared objectives. Thematically, I find that troubling. Admittedly, most Tolkien-descended fantasy (Shannara, Eddings, Goodkind, Jordan) has a 'magical stranger' as 'quest giver'. But Moorcock descended fantasy does not. Iunno. Maybe this is what attract me to FATE and dresden files, which sets up character relationships?

Awarding XP

Matt Miller

Hearsay has it than in early DnD, treasure was the goal, as (originally) players could translate gold into XP.  Over time, this switched so that  most XP came from defeating enemies in combat. I don't think the intent was to make combat the main source of XP, but good tables on appropriate amounts of XP are available for combat, but none for other types of encounters. People respond to incentives.

Dan Felder

This is why all my systems and campaigns in other systems always shift things to have XP awarded for accomplishing goals. Combat inherently provides nothing, but you can use it as a way to achieve a goal. 

Keith J Davies 

Indeed. Reward the behavior you want to see. If it's 'kill everything', give XP for killing stuff. If you want to see 'cunningly recover..treasure', leave combat out of the XP calculation because it's only an obstacle, and reward 'recover...treasure'.

Owen Wylde 

I interpreted "gold to XP" to mean paying for training. Some of my DMs only allowed levelling up after gaining enough XP then paying for training. 

Alexander Staniforth

The difficulty with it was that gold is reward in itself as it allows you access to rare goods etc. So in getting gold you are rewarded twice. I prefer pure accomplishment and GM decision (with a smattering of group decision should everyone be impressed).

Cory Magel 

The group I play with most regularly moved to mission/goal based exp. ....it removes the need for tracking and encourages a team effort. I, personally, will just tell the group when to level. So long as everyone is happy with the pace and progress it lets you slow and speed up the pace of the campaign as desired.

 Nathan Dowdell 

....there are a number of systems that handle character growth in different ways - Fate uses milestones in the story to govern changes to characters, while Smallville (Cortex Plus Drama) based character development on stress and challenging personal beliefs, so that characters suffer dramatically in order to grow.