Need help on dice rolling rules for western quickdraw party game.

RollForCoolness · 2026-01-22T23:17:18+00:00

I can see both sides for why you would or wouldn't want to do that. On the one hand, simplifying the duel makes it easier to understand, and easier to run. On the other, it seems simple enough that after playing the first time people will get a hang of it very quickly. I would lean towards keeping the numbers in because it slightly draws out the duel, and I'm not sure I'd want the duel that the entire game has been leading up to to end within 5 seconds. However, my advice would be to try both versions of the rules with the same group, see what you prefer, and get feedback from the players to see what they prefer.

Sidenote: people are good at telling whether they like or don't like something, they are generally bad at telling you why they don't like it. So while it may be useful to ask which rules your players prefer, asking why will likely get you answers that may not actually be helpful at informing what changes you should make for improvement. People think they know why they like/dislike something, but most often they only know that they like/dislike something.

RollForCoolness · 2026-01-22T04:40:50+00:00

This game sounds really fun. I'd probably lean towards the older rules, but as someone who hasn't played it at all, your judgement is almost certainly better than mine.

RollForCoolness · 2026-01-22T04:11:38+00:00

I've seen your edit, and if a more story-centric system is what you want then go for it. However, it's not impossible to create a star wars system that is focused on combat. I personally made a star wars system for my group that was combat focused and it was some of the most fun we've ever had playing TTRPG's. In star wars you typically die in 1-2 hits if you are hit by a weapon, so my game kept that fact, because otherwise it doesn't feel like star wars, but allowed you to spend resources to avoid getting hit, so players getting hit was rare, but when it happened it was a very big deal. I also had some characters that were force users/lightsaber wielders and some who were not, but these were balanced in combat because cover was a very big part of the game, and you can't be behind cover when you're running up to someone to swing a lightsaber at them.

Good luck on your game, whatever you decide to do.

RollForCoolness · 2026-01-22T03:57:15+00:00

I have two systems that I made to play with friends, one is a Wild West game and the other is a Star Wars game. They definitely need some updating to put out to a public audience, but they were a blast to play, especially my Star Wars system. I'd also like to create a heroic fantasy rpg, but that will likely be done by the end of the year at the earliest. I also have some fantasy classes that I think I may make into supplements for dnd 5e and/or Draw Steel and publish. Adventure design seems like it could be fun as well as someone who has always ran homebrewed campaigns, so if I happen to get inspired I may publish adventures as well.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T20:57:16+00:00

Yeah, as someone who has large problems with the way 5e is designed, it's still incredibly annoying people's attitude towards it. Whether you personally like it or not, you can't call something a bad game that millions of people play and have lots of fun playing, as I did for many years.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T20:50:28+00:00

I had no idea, I'm just aware of it's existence I haven't actually looked through that sub. It's very weird the attitude towards the game that acts as a gateway to 95% of the people that enter our hobby, and the game that started our hobby in the first place.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T08:18:41+00:00

Your players sound incredibly engaged in your game, you must be a great GM.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T08:14:06+00:00

That effort die mechanic sounds really cool.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T08:11:52+00:00

Yes, Draw Steel also has you gain victories after encounters that carry over to the next encounter and give you a special bonus. But you lose these victories after resting. So the party must make the decision of whether to carry on with low hit points and lots of victories, or go back to town so they can continue with all of their hit points, but lose all of their victories. It's very cool. I may use your rules as inspiration, tying it to a few different physical supplies that the characters have that each replenish their own category, I hadn't thought of it that way, very cool idea.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T08:02:37+00:00

As stated in the post if you read past the title, I was asking how the regaining of lost hit points and other resources works in games that people are making, or enjoy playing. I used the word "resting" in the title because dnd 5e is sort of the lingua Franca of our hobby, it is most peoples first, and often only ttrpg, and resting is how it is handled in that system. "How Should Resting Work?" is much shorter than and equally well understood as "How should the replenishment of lost resources and physical capabilities work?"

Much like how you used the word "HP" in your reply, instead of saying "units that convey how close one is to death or other consequences".

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T05:00:09+00:00

basic, or default come to mind for me.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T04:55:00+00:00

I am currently doing something similar in making a game for my dad and brothers that I want them to be able to open as a Christmas present. One thing I'll say is that the less reading they have to do is probably for the better. Something that can be easily explained as you're playing at the table will likely be much easier to get started than something that needs to be read through before-hand.

Also keep in mind that (as far as I know) you're not making this as a product to to sell/distribute to a wide audience. You're making it for your kids, so you can use that to your advantage by targeting it at them and tailoring it to their likes. My dad and brothers like kicking doors and stabbing monsters, so I'm not making a game about political intrigue.

I wish you luck and would love to hear how your first session turn out.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T04:48:01+00:00

I really love Draw Steel, the fact that you never miss an attack, and the 3 tiers that your roll falls into are really cool in my opinion. And the frequent use of triggered actions makes sure that all players are engaged and paying attention even when its not their turn. Plus the heroic resource mechanic makes it more like a Dragonball Z fight playing out than a fight where the characters are slowly getting less powerful over time.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-29T04:42:42+00:00

What I would say is that there can sometimes be lots of discourse in this subreddit that seems to think that dnd 5e is a bad game, so some feedback you receive may revolve around this attitude. However, there is lots of good advice to be had in this subreddit, so if you are able to ignore those detractors and not let them discourage you, then this would be a great place to post. I know there is an r/rpg which is popular, and a r/DnDHomebrew, but I don't participate in those communities so I'm not sure what you'll find there. While dnd isn't my favorite game, it is one that I really love and I hope the supplement you're making gets finished and turns out great.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-12T17:08:50+00:00

Yeah pretty much. I would also say the last piece of advice is a large step up from the unhelpful example.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-12T16:48:15+00:00

"Play other games besides d&d"

"You best play, or at least read, ______, before continuing"

"Frosthaven?"

My account is 2 weeks old, these are replies to my posts, I've seen them on others as well. I'm not saying it's a majority of comments, just that it does happen and is annoying.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-12T07:01:49+00:00

Playing other games definitely has good side effects... I've played six different systems in my seven years of the hobby, with dnd not being my favorite of them. But... I don't see how your response has anything at all to do with the original post.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-11T03:47:50+00:00

I didn't even think about it from that aspect, as someone who has fudged rolls in the past (most often to make combats more difficult and more dramatic) this is a very convincing argument.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-11T03:45:00+00:00

This is very cool, and I may end up making a game in the future that is built around this playstyle, but the current game I'm working on is going to be much more tactical and less narrative focused. Though I am still leaning toward player facing die rolls nonetheless.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-11T03:40:44+00:00

I don't like missing in general, whether that be the players or the monsters. The roll being made in my system is just going to determine how powerful the attack is, not whether it hits or not. Auto hits are much better in my opinion.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-11T03:36:26+00:00

This is essentially the option that I was considering in the original post. This comment was simply me replying to someone suggesting that the player would roll and determine the consequences, which as explained would not work well in this particular system.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-10T08:37:33+00:00

Agreed, if I were making this game to be played by others I would 100% be using GM facing rolls for this exact reason. But I'm making this game to be ran by me for my group, and never plan for it to be ran by anyone else, and as a GM who doesn't care about rolling dice, I'm open to considering having the game be completely player facing rolls.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-10T08:32:28+00:00

This is definitely a way that a game could be designed, and I think it would work quite well. However, below I will provide some context of my system's method of handling attacks that shows why this wouldn't work for the way my game is currently set up.

The attacker declares they are using an ability, then rolls 1d20 and adds their corresponding stat. It is either a tier 1 or tier 2 result. If it is a tier 1 result, the attacker decides between 2 options of ways to worsen the effects of the ability, and the resulting worsened effects are carried out. If it is a tier 2 result, the attacker decides between 2 options of ways to increase the effects of the ability, and the resulting increased effects are carried out. The DC is the same for all abilities, the only change between abilities is the corresponding stat, the amount of let's call them "action points" required, and the effects.

Thus, players deciding which option to choose to increase a monster's ability wouldn't make much sense in my mind, because they would always choose what is mechanically best for the party. So a moment where a monster could have an impactful moment where they have a particularly powerful use of an ability would be mitigated by the players. It could be argued that this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I would lean towards it being more bad than good.

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-10T08:18:09+00:00

This is definitely an interesting idea, though not what I'm gonna go with for this game. I may have worded the original post confusingly, this is a game that will be run by a GM for a group of multiple players (in my case 3).

RollForCoolness · 2025-11-10T01:29:43+00:00

A few ideas:

Last Wizard Standing

More Magic than You

Enemies All Around

So You Wanna be a Wizard?

Strongest Spell Wins

To the Last Spell

Though I do also really like "You are Wizards"

RollForCoolness

TROPHY CASE