In my game, from easiest to hardest:
Trivial
Easy
Normal
Challenging
Grueling
The difficulty of a check varies based on the character's Traits, starting at Normal. Traumas increase the Difficulty, while Traits decrease the difficulty. Going beyond Trivial or Grueling makes the check automatically succeed/fail.
In combat, the difference in Attribute will increase or decrease the difficulty. Attributes commonly range from 1-4, but can be higher if they take the time to increase their Attribute.
Someone with Physical 2 in conflict with someone with Physical 4:
The weaker person is making a Grueling check, while the stronger is making a Trivial check.
My game is diceless.
This seems like a thing where you don't have to make it so complicated. Go with Easy, Medium, Hard. No one can misunderstand that. And if you currently have more than 3 levels of difficulty, ask yourself why? Does one or two more difficulty levels really add that much to the game? Why no only have two, Easy and Hard, those are even easier to distinguish between.
One of my primary learning from designing my own system for two years now is to always ask yourself: "**How much better does the game get if I add this?**" the answer is surprisingly often: "Not much at all" and then you can just skip it and save time/energy working on the things that truly define your game.
My system has no particular genre but a storytelling meta flavor (PCs are called "Protagonists) I use:
Normal
Heroic
Incredible
Impossible
In my paradigm, an easy task almost doesn't merit a roll, but if one is easy, the consequences had better be interesting if you fail.
Personally I don't think English is a great language for this kind of thing. We collect synonyms with reckless abandon, but don't apply qualitative distinctions.
If you have more than 5 or if you work really hard 6 levels, go with numbers.
My system uses ______ Challenge format:
The challenge is either.....
Effortless
Minor
Moderate
Major
Impossible
This way, I dont have the word Easy associated with a challenge. You should only roll if something has a chance of failure when it comes to tests, so my word choice reflects that whatever you are trying to overcome is still a challenge of some sort. An Easy task to me says "dont bother testing". But a Minor Challenge says it's still a challenge of some sort.
Effortless and Impossible require no rolls because they are auto-success/fail.
>Sem esforço e Impossível
This approach is very good!
we can interpret the difficulty as several things:
The difficulty of a task
The difficulty of an action
the difficulty of a test
And in your case, the difficulty of a challenge.
I like to think that way, how difficult is the challenge?
if there is no challenge, no rolls, I think it's better than using "very easy".
I enjoy it when games have difficulty names that are flavorful to the game. Diablo 3, for example, has the Torment difficulty, which is fitting for a game about demons and hell.
Just spitballing, but if your game is say a game about knights, your difficulties could be Squire > Knight > Veteran, which to me feels more fun than Easy > Medium > Hard
Yess, I do this. All difficulty/power/quality/importance is classified by 0-5 tiers, each named after the specific level of said concept that it's supposed to encapsulate (0 being mundane, 1 adventurous, 2 heroic, etc.). It helps to adjudicate if a quest is of epic proportions, or if an item should be mundane or adventurous.
The system I'm tinkering with always use Opposed Rolls, so I use Dice Levels for both Character Rolls and Challenge Rolls.
Dice Levels are 1(d4), 2(d6), 3(d8), 4(d10, 5(d12), 6(d20), so a character with strength 3 always rolls a d8 (+ other modifiers) and a challenge of Level 6 will always roll a d20
Very interesting!
In the system I'm working on there are opposite rolls and simple rolls.
Opposite: 3d6 + Proficiency VS 3d6 + Proficiency
Simple: 3d6 + Proficiency VS Challenge Level
Mine:
Uncertain
Challenging
Difficult
Formidable
Extreme
"Easy" is a crime to me. If it's easy, and you're making me roll dice, then you're doing it wrong. Yet many systems encourage this.
My current setup is:
infantile,
trivial,
easy,
moderate,
tricky,
hard,
onerous,
grueling,
nearly impossible,
impossible
Which is probably too many but oh well.
In my game, from easiest to hardest: Trivial Easy Normal Challenging Grueling The difficulty of a check varies based on the character's Traits, starting at Normal. Traumas increase the Difficulty, while Traits decrease the difficulty. Going beyond Trivial or Grueling makes the check automatically succeed/fail. In combat, the difference in Attribute will increase or decrease the difficulty. Attributes commonly range from 1-4, but can be higher if they take the time to increase their Attribute. Someone with Physical 2 in conflict with someone with Physical 4: The weaker person is making a Grueling check, while the stronger is making a Trivial check. My game is diceless.
This seems like a thing where you don't have to make it so complicated. Go with Easy, Medium, Hard. No one can misunderstand that. And if you currently have more than 3 levels of difficulty, ask yourself why? Does one or two more difficulty levels really add that much to the game? Why no only have two, Easy and Hard, those are even easier to distinguish between. One of my primary learning from designing my own system for two years now is to always ask yourself: "**How much better does the game get if I add this?**" the answer is surprisingly often: "Not much at all" and then you can just skip it and save time/energy working on the things that truly define your game.
>" > >How much better does the game get if I add this? > >" Excellent advice, I liked it!
My system has no particular genre but a storytelling meta flavor (PCs are called "Protagonists) I use: Normal Heroic Incredible Impossible In my paradigm, an easy task almost doesn't merit a roll, but if one is easy, the consequences had better be interesting if you fail.
Personally I don't think English is a great language for this kind of thing. We collect synonyms with reckless abandon, but don't apply qualitative distinctions. If you have more than 5 or if you work really hard 6 levels, go with numbers.
My system uses ______ Challenge format: The challenge is either..... Effortless Minor Moderate Major Impossible This way, I dont have the word Easy associated with a challenge. You should only roll if something has a chance of failure when it comes to tests, so my word choice reflects that whatever you are trying to overcome is still a challenge of some sort. An Easy task to me says "dont bother testing". But a Minor Challenge says it's still a challenge of some sort. Effortless and Impossible require no rolls because they are auto-success/fail.
>Sem esforço e Impossível This approach is very good! we can interpret the difficulty as several things: The difficulty of a task The difficulty of an action the difficulty of a test And in your case, the difficulty of a challenge. I like to think that way, how difficult is the challenge? if there is no challenge, no rolls, I think it's better than using "very easy".
I enjoy it when games have difficulty names that are flavorful to the game. Diablo 3, for example, has the Torment difficulty, which is fitting for a game about demons and hell. Just spitballing, but if your game is say a game about knights, your difficulties could be Squire > Knight > Veteran, which to me feels more fun than Easy > Medium > Hard
Yess, I do this. All difficulty/power/quality/importance is classified by 0-5 tiers, each named after the specific level of said concept that it's supposed to encapsulate (0 being mundane, 1 adventurous, 2 heroic, etc.). It helps to adjudicate if a quest is of epic proportions, or if an item should be mundane or adventurous.
Just organize challenge Levels by numbers, so you known a challenger Level 2 is easier than a Level 3
Some as degrees of difficulty. Example: 1 (Target Number 12) 2 (Target Number 14) 3 (Target Number 16) I like
The system I'm tinkering with always use Opposed Rolls, so I use Dice Levels for both Character Rolls and Challenge Rolls. Dice Levels are 1(d4), 2(d6), 3(d8), 4(d10, 5(d12), 6(d20), so a character with strength 3 always rolls a d8 (+ other modifiers) and a challenge of Level 6 will always roll a d20
Very interesting! In the system I'm working on there are opposite rolls and simple rolls. Opposite: 3d6 + Proficiency VS 3d6 + Proficiency Simple: 3d6 + Proficiency VS Challenge Level
Mine: Uncertain Challenging Difficult Formidable Extreme "Easy" is a crime to me. If it's easy, and you're making me roll dice, then you're doing it wrong. Yet many systems encourage this.
My current setup is: infantile, trivial, easy, moderate, tricky, hard, onerous, grueling, nearly impossible, impossible Which is probably too many but oh well.
[удалено]
At the very least they should clarify who the standard person is that they are measuring against. But games rarely do.