I was thinking about changing the way luck points worked. So instead of just giving you 3 extra dice (which may fail), it would automatically give you 1-3 bonus successes (a random factor limited by your base skill number). I think it kinda sucks to spend a luck point and not get anything out of it.
I think it’s been too long since I’ve thrown FS3 dice, but from what I remember, I didn’t have a huge problem with a Luck Point still not gaining you anything if you still roll abysmally. I mean, yes, it’s frustrating, and annoying, but not critically-so in my opinion.
I think that the danger in making it automatic successes is that in any sort of contested roll (like combat), it may still not end up succeeding (you wouldn’t Miss, but you could still be Dodged), and in other situations, it would entirely remove any risk to rolling (you need to succeed in your Athletics check to not fall while you jump between the two ships).
Overall, I don’t know that it would hurt anything to make that change, it might help, but I don’t know that it would have the effect (at least to me) that you’re intending it to have.
I’m tempted to say ‘yes’ , because I HATED spending a luck point and still failing.
But I’m a little concerned that, although in practice it simplifies things, it may be harder to understand. I’m not sure how much your average person gets what ‘successes’ are or how they factor into things, especially if they’re on a game that’s using combat but not really general skill rolls.
I’ve run one game that relied mostly on the combat end, and it wasn’t until I started getting deep under the hood to code for a game that relies on rolls more heavily that I really got it (and I’d read all the FS3.2 documentation seeeeeveral times). I’ve explained it to my husband like 5 times now, and have to re-explain every time I’m asking his thoughts on a system change.
So IDK. I think it’d probably be a good idea if you can come up with a good way to make it easy to understand without having to completely get what all goes on under the hood of a combat roll (speaking of, I now give a tiny lol every time someone tells me how simple FS3 is). A table with percentages like you gave above might do it.
And really, I think some people probably interpret +3 to mean a straight +3 like in DND anyway so.
That’s quite true, but I’m not sure that most players really do try to understand FS3 mechanics though. They don’t have to. They know that they’re “Good” at something, and they can roll it and get “Success” or “Great Success”. They don’t really care how the dice work under the hood.
If I made a roll/luck command that spent luck on the roll, it could all be handled behind-the-scenes and they wouldn’t even need to know that there was a +3 involved at all, let alone what it meant.
Yeah, my point is kind of that I think players sort of get what +3 means, but probably wouldn’t get what +1 success means. So you’d need to have a good way of communicating the effects of it without having to get nitty gritty.
I was kind of thinking while I typed, you can probably tell.
Do you really need to have a good way of communicating the effects though?
The only reason people knew it was +3 at all is because there’s currently no way to factor in luck into a roll unless you do it manually. So they have to know that spending a luck means they type roll Whatever+3 even if they don’t really understand what the +3 does for them.
If that was hidden in the code via a roll/luck command, they wouldn’t even know that it was +3 in the first place. It could be +2 or +5 or something that automatically converts half of your dice to successes, or just something that automatically succeeds.
They wouldn’t need to understand the luck mechanic any more than they need to understand the roll mechanic itself, or the combat/subdue mechanic.
Unless of course you’re the type who wants to know the mechanics, in which case you can read the mechanics documents to find out what’s going on behind the scenes. I think most players, though, don’t really dive that deep.