(in D&D at least)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I disagree that 1% chance is a jackpot but 5% isn't. I'm using jackpot as an analogy for the emotional impact of a rarer, higher tier win mechanic - I don't think specifying a number is useful here. That feeling can happen with a range of different rarities.

I'm not following your point about nat 1s, free gimmes or supply and demand.

I think we're using very different ideas of game design. Are you using good design in the sense of like "tactically balanced"? I think of good game design as setting up and meeting player expectations for fun while minimizing frustration.

The game sets up rolling 20 and critting as a win big moment. To occasionally then deny players that fails to meet expectations and creates disappointment. That's why I think it's bad design. And why most people don't play it as written.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Elden ring absolutely does meet player expectations - challenge is the expectation of the souls-like genre.

    6 Charisma can roll a 20 and be able to convince whomever of whatever

    Certain people should never be able to make certain successes

    only as amazingly as they are capable

    I don't disagree with any of this but I'm not talking about how the win should look in the fiction.

    It's just that when you roll a crit but don't get a crit, most players will get extra disappointed. That's a fact of the human experience that no rules text will ever change.

    Good design accounts for the reality of how people actually use a thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Disagree. People misuse stuff constantly.

    Woah wait now. Sure people misuse things but designing with that in mind always produces a better thing than ignoring reality. A gun with a safety is a objectively a better design than a gun with no safety, even if the both have a manual that says not to play with the trigger and keep away from kids.

    on them for just not reading the rules

    The game trains you to expect a dopamine reward when you roll a 20. A game that consistently meets the expectations it creates would be a better game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment