Hello again everyone,

So, meanwhile, I had this game in mind for a while. I really have a thing with dreams and folk traditions.

Tell me what is missing, or what you would improve.

https://exiledoracles.itch.io/good-night

Thanks. Good night.

This is something that’s inspired by a different post about solving problems. What are some challenges, issues, or problems that you solved for your system via game design? Particularly ones that you feel proud of.

ALTS is on its fifth iteration and it feels like everytime I fix one problem I create another, or dig up an issue I thought I’d buried.

Here’s an example:

One of the issues I had early on is with a mechanic called Angst, where originally it was a straight penalty, every angst you collected reduced you result by 1. You could only reduce it rolling on a challenge with your weakest stat.

The problem was initially two fold, it was to punishing, and it was to fiddly. It broke a personal rule of “players only do math once” and it caused players to just bounce between their best stats and their worst stats for die rolls.

So I adjusted the math, you only take penalty on the roll every couple of angst. Which was better but only in the sense that it delayed the issue. -1 on a at the time d12 system is still significant. It still felt fiddly at the table but you interacted with it slightly less.

Back to the drawing board. On iteration 3 and 4 we moved to being a 2d6 system for better control of the results. Which lead me to a way of fixing don’t do math twice. Now when angst accumulated past a certain amount, you only rolled 1 dice instead of two. It felt nice, elegant even… play-tests still showed it as being to punishing. We tweaked it here and there, but keeping track of Angst still felt fiddly, and the results were punishing to the point that people never really engaged risked angst beyond its first penalty.

Iteration 5 had the biggest leap. I shifted to using cards and tokens as required materials for the game. Angst shifted to a mechanic closer the stress from blades in the dark, and changed the 1 dice down penalty to be triggered under a different mechanic that having a bunch of angst would then make worse.

The use of tokens made tracking angst far easier, it also let me implement a stealing mechanic where instead of being a individual thing to manage, it all came from the same pool, which means every time you took angst to buff your roll, you made the other players position a little bit better. The gameplay finally felt smooth and the shifting of the angst penalty to its own new mechanic finally incentivized players to shift away from using only one or two of their core stats to solve problems.

TL/DR:

What are some issues you’ve run into while playing your game that you’ve solved through game design and mechanics?

Extra points is the answer isn’t “it wasn’t working or adding anything so I removed it.” Which is fair, but boring to read.

I recently self-published a game and just this past week it's started to sell well. And by that I mean it's selling more than I expected. Anyway this morning I got my first use of AI accusation on Drivethrurpg. Anyone have experience with this or have any idea how common this accusation is? I am a bit taken aback because the meat of the text and all the art is from something I self-published in 2016 before AI existed. It's gone through a ton of iteration since then, but the root is there. Admittedly I've done what is essentially spellchecks through AI to catch mistakes and inconsistencies (like when i change a rule and don't fix it in all the places it's mentioned) and some ideas for some of the table layouts (of tables that already existed), which I then adjusted, cut and pasted, and they're all tables made in Word, so nothing fancy (which is a nightmare btw, i regret not learning Indesign and doing it in there). Other than that, nothing was generated but as much as there is no proof of AI use it's also just my word against theirs, right?

I'm running a D&D campaign that is based off '80s action movies, the campaign is designed to begin with a die-hard homage, before becoming a series of adventures that are plays on the terminator, predator, assault on precinct 13, and escape from New york.

I want to give the players access to a collection of '80s movie inspired feats, it's worth noting that this setting has firearms and vehicles alongside magical abilities.

I want to give the abilities names that are references to old movies or famous quotes from them.

Someone's already come up with are

Body snatcher - you can create disguises off of unconscious or killed foes that provide advantage on checks related to pretending to be that person

Die hard - the lower your health bar the better you roll (play testing the exact numbers still)

You feel lucky punk? - once per combat encounter if an enemy hits you with an attack you can reflect the damage back on them.

I am the night - double the stealth bonus of being in darkness

Terminator - when you down an enemy in combat you could immediately perform another attack

Predator - on a critical success on an attack, you can immediately perform a stealth check and vanish from sight if you pass.

Road warrior - whenever you perform a vehicle operation action, you may immediately perform an additional action.

Anybody have a good ideas for additional ones?

I was recently introduced to RISUS from a few commenters here and I absolutely love the simplicity of it, especially the cliches and how it handles rounds and group rolls. It’s given me a lot of ideas for how to keep things rules lite.

But I’m wondering if there’s a system that has a bit more crunch without needing 100 pages of rules, especially around creating characters or even for weapons/damage/armor or conditions that affect the player. Just something with slightly more guidance or restrictions on a mechanical level.

I’m familiar with PbtA, Fate, Genesys, City of Mist, BitD, and similar. But ideally looking for something between RISUS and Fate/BitD if it exists?

Hi. I am new to RPG designs and only doing it as a hobby.

I have been looking into different existing systems to see what suits best the games I would like to work on.

I am pretty interested in the way Wanderhome handle the generation of new locations, giving basic ideas for the player to make their own locations and develop them through the gameplay.

Does anyone know if this is based on an existing system I could learn more about and maybe get tips? Or is it just their own thing that they came up with? Are their other similar open ways to guid the players to come up with their own ideas?

I'm designing a mechanic where attributes range from 1 to 10 (or at least 1–5). The result is determined by opposed rolls: each side counts successes (rolling 6s on d6), and the defender's successes cancel the attacker's successes.

Here's what I've come up with in AnyDice so far:

function: hits ROLL:s {
  result: [count 6 in ROLL]
}
output [hits 6d6] > [hits 1d6]
output [hits 6d6] > [hits 5d6]
output [hits 10d6] > [hits 1d6]
output [hits 10d6] > [hits 5d6]

In practice, the active party (e.g., the attacker) rolls 5 + its attribute value (so attribute 3 → 8d6), while the passive party (defender) rolls just its attribute value. In the examples above, the attribute ranges from 1 to 5.

P.S. Sorry for my English.

P.P.S.: Just to clarify — any dice pool system that gives the active party a success probability ranging from about 25–30% up to 70–75% will work for me.

So im writing my own ttrpg, and for combat, im playing around with the idea of Action Points. Every player has a certain number of AP, and every action costs a certain number of AP.

Just a few examples (AP isnt set in stone yet):

Attack: 3 AP

Move: 1 AP per space

Disengage: 3 AP

Help: 4 AP

Climb /Swim: 2AP per space

Another point im hoping to stick to is really having every stat being a rolled number. This gives the stats a lot of swing between good and bad, and I think thats going to be a feature of the game. Some players may be very good or very bad at certain stats. So, I was playing around with a characters AP being equal to 3d4, re-roll any score lower than maybe 5 or 6.

I suppose my question is this; am I getting too far out there having something like AP be a variable between players? Is it too unfair, and more importantly NOT FUN to have some players be as low as 6 or 7, and other players be as high as 11 or 12 AP?

I guess, ultimately, is equal action economy the most important factor for fairness and fun?

Please discuss. Thank you!

UPDATE

You all made very convincing arguments, thank you for your input! At the core of this game, its supposed to be simple, fun, and just a bunch of goof ball antics! And the AP idea doesnt fit with that at all. Ive decided to bag it for a more simple version. You get two actions per turn. You can use any one of those to attack, move, help and so on. Ultimately being fun is the name of the game, and my idea was not that. Lmao!

Thank you!

Hello, just looking for some advice. I've been working on this system and playtesting with a group in tandem. We're 15 sessions in, and I have done many switch-ups, not so much on the main mechanics but auxiliary mechanics and playbooks. I feel like I'm running out of gas, I want to put something out there, the manual is mostly written, I just need to colate it, maybe redo some of the art. But between running the campaign and integrating all the constructive criticisms the goal looks farther and farther away. Should I push through or take a break ? I'm worried the break might turn into a hiatus...

Anybody else been through this ? Did finally publishing refresh you ?

I'm using the AD&D 2e Worldbuilder's Handbook, which is a very promising resource, to create my world maps, but I don't like the way the Continents and Geography chapter handles terrain placement. Similarly, I find the terrain generation rules in the Kingdoms and Sociology chapter to be a bit too vague. (And random placement rules for the Cities and Provinces chapter barely exist at all!)

Hi, still working on Eat the Elite, quick summary:

Welcome to the highest tier of gastronomy.

The Superrich have spent centuries consuming everything: our labor, our homes, our time. They treat us like cattle.
Now it is time to turn the tables.

You are a group of culinary specialists pulling off impossible heists against the untouchable 1%. You will breach their estates, manipulate their security, and use their smart home gadgets against them.

Bon appétit.

It is a lightweight, heist game. At the end of each heist you are getting to eat the rich person, which can give bonusses (basically a level up) but I think I made this part of the game overly complicated and clunky.

Basically every character gets a roll that influences the outcome and the bonuses (or maluses) of the meat, here some examples

1 . Sous-Chef

Roll on Order to coordinate your team

Success - One  of your crew gets +1 on their roll
Fail - Nothing
1 - All of your crew gets +1 on their roll
10 - All of your crew gets -1 on their roll

2. Boucher

Roll on Heat to cut the best pieces

Success - You gain 3 cuts of prime meat
Fail - You get 1 cut of prime meat
1 - You get 5 cuts of prime meat
10 - You get nothing

5. Pâtissier

Roll on Finesse

Success - You can choose for 2 cuts which stats are boosted
Fail - Nothing
1 - You can choose for all cuts which stats are boosted
10 - You ruin one of the cuts and have to throw it away

I am trying to find a better, fast, less complicated way to handle this and thankfull for any suggestion or inspiration :)

​

This is for our TTRPG SORC. The game is about halfway done but I feel this part of it is well enough to share. Today I was asked to help fix a ranged attack problems and this is where I am at. You may get links to other subjects, but this is about ranged attacking and I feel it is close to completion.

I will be adding low and high ground advantages and disadvantages. Now I have velocity at point blank, and I have added a stabilization point where the vhit is strong again. I think have a velocity drop power losses. So I've added all of this to our ranged system but on for Earthborn weapons and not the TAW or Energy weapons which are technically advanced and weapons that use the universes elemental energy. More on those elements later because SORC right now has a lot of elements and they just added Aura which changes the characters presence. Again more on these things later. There is a lot to iron out, but it all makes sense to us, so if you happen to stray away from this topic I would need to ask other people. I can answer any concerns related to 'ranged attack' but they is it. I am also seeking for advice because this might be too much or too little for some.

To the reader. We use very complex systems in SORC and sometimes they take a while to calculate. On the other hand, the system below only required the GM to know one thing and that is “the distance the attack is from the target.”

We do have three styles of play choices for players and I am listing them below. That said, if you were to choose the casual system, it locks on and only Hit would be calculated on the table. If you choose Improvised, you can take out or keep the elements you choose to. We have an appendix and glossary online and this would be part of the campaign creating process.

If you don't mind a very crunchy style, and you don't mind long though during your turns (like in chess), then feel free to play under enthusiastic style, where all the rules are locked in.

Casual - a lot of the system's rules are dropped. It is bare bones. locked in. This version changes the table below, so that only hit is modified by range. That approach is simple.

Improvised - rule manipulation but must be set before the campaign begins.

Enthusiastic - all in. locked in.

Ranged Attacks

1. What could I add?

2. What should be removed?

3. What isn't explained right?

I would like to know.

I would really appreciate some fresh eyes on my free game "Coins for the Dead." It is a crunchy, simulationist dark fantasy TTRPG where every choice, coin, and piece of gear matters.

The game has been overhauled significantly since I last posted. I have refined the skill system, added new magic items, expanded the bestiary, and rebalanced a lot of the mechanics. I would love to know what works, what does not, and what could be clearer. Honest feedback is welcome.

If you have time to check it out and let me know your thoughts, I would be very grateful. I know I am asking for your time, so in return I am happy to take a detailed look at your projects and review them to the best of my ability. Just drop a link to your project and I will take a look.

You can find the game here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-IXKTeBi-6E2eiiWDdvc1CU8vagDb9VSfVI7Hczdsbs/edit?usp=drivesdk

Thank you so much to anyone who takes a look. I really appreciate this community.

I'm a solo game designer and I've finally reached the part of this process that I don't think I was prepared for.

You spend all this time coming up with an idea, designing it, testing it, changing things that don't work, making the artwork, figuring out production, and eventually you have an actual finished game sitting in your hands.

And then comes the question:

How do you get it outside your own circle?

I've been working on social media and talking to local people, but I'd really like to hear from other indie/solo designers who have already crossed this bridge.

What actually worked for you?

Reviewers? Conventions? Local game stores? Reddit? Facebook groups? BoardGameGeek? Paid advertising? Sending copies to creators? Just slowly building a community?

And are there any good Reddit threads, communities, Discords, articles, or other resources specifically about the marketing/discovery side after the design and publishing work is done?

I'm not looking to advertise my game here or drop a sales link. I'm genuinely trying to learn this side of the business.

I put a hell of a lot into making something I'm proud of. Now I'm trying to figure out how a one-person designer makes sure his game doesn't live and die with himself, his friends, and the handful of people who happened to find it.

I'd love to hear what worked—and what absolutely didn't—from people who've been through it.

Hello everyone!

In the previous devlog, I talked about why I chose a 2d12 roll-under system for AstraWeaver.

In this devlog, I will talk about how dice actually work in AstraWeaver. I'll explain how I arrived at the core resolution mechanic, how the attributes evolved, and how to represent different levels of challenge in player-facing roll-under systems.

———

Connecting Two Numbers to be a skill

AstraWeaver is a classless, level-less, highly customizable, crunchy high fantasy RPG about connecting small pieces into something extraordinary. Whether that's your character build, your magic, your equipment, or your team.

Since connection is such a central concept, I wanted the core resolution mechanic to involve connecting multiple elements.

For my lazy brain, adding three or more numbers together becomes significantly more complicated than combining just two. Compared to the additional granularity that more dice could provide, I don’t think that extra complexity is worth it.

Special shout-out to The Tome of Lime Gaming—they have a great video discussing the idea of an “elegance factor,” where elegance = granularity / complexity. I found it to be a really useful way to think about dice mechanics and the trade-off between complexity and granularity. Go check it out if you’re interested; I learned a lot from it.

So I decided to keep it at two numbers.

The core resolution mechanic is combine two numbers to create a target number. I call this target number the Check Threshold (CT).

When a check happens, the GM decides where one of those numbers comes from, while the player decides where the other number comes from. At the moment, the player's number comes from one of their attributes, and it cannot be the same attribute chosen by the GM.

Most of the time, the GM's number will also come from an attribute. But it doesn't have to. It could represent an NPC's current mood, the tension of the scene, or some other temporary condition. This gives me a lot of flexibility when designing other mechanics while keeping the core resolution consistent.

And because attributes are the main way players interact with the world through this system, let's talk about how those attributes evolved.

How the Attributes Evolved

My basic assumption was that very few things people do can truly achieved by a single ability.

When facing a challenge, I wanted players to combine two attributes to represent how their character approaches that challenge. My original design had six attributes divided across body, mind, and interpersonal interaction: Might, Agility, Instinct, Intelligence, Charisma, and Authority.

Newly created characters will have all their attributes set between 5 and 8.

After some time, however, I realized that Charisma and Authority were simply too difficult to distinguish. Imagine a character trying to persuade someone using knowledge from their background. Would that be Intelligence + Charisma, or Intelligence + Authority?

In many cases, the difference would simply come down to how the player described their dialogue. If I used the numbers to enforce that distinction, a player with high Authority might feel pressured to constantly describe their character as being forceful or intimidating simply because that gave them a better chance of success.

That would mean the mechanics were restricting roleplay instead of supporting it.

So I removed Authority and kept Charisma, giving players more freedom to decide how their character approaches a situation.

Ten Skills Without Names

At this point, you might notice something interesting.

With five attributes, there are ten possible pairs.

In many RPGs, those ten combinations could simply become ten named skills. I deliberately chose not to do that.

In a way, AstraWeaver is actually a skill-based game. It just doesn't give those skills names.

The reason is that naming each combination can also define its boundaries. Once you call something "Athletics," for example, players may naturally assume what it can and cannot be used for. It's good for determining which skill to use in which situation. But sometimes, the skill doesn't quite represent how I'm going to do something. So instead, I want the attributes to provide broad concepts, while the combination represents the way a character approaches a challenge.

This does mean I still need to provide some basic guidance for each attribute, so players and GMs are roughly on the same page about what each one represents. The goal isn't to restrict how they can be used, but to reduce unnecessary arguments over interpretation at the table.

How to Adjust Difficulty?

One challenge with a mostly fixed player-facing roll-under system is that the target number doesn't naturally change very much.

So what does an unmodified check actually represent?

In my current design, an ordinary, unmodified challenge roughly means:

• An untrained ordinary person has about one third of chance to succeed on their first attempt. (CT=11)
• Someone with apprentice has about a 50% chance. (CT=13)
• Someone with expert has about a 75% chance.(CT=16)

That's what a normal, unmodified check represents in AstraWeaver.

But what if the GM wants something to be harder?

Instead of constantly adjusting numbers, the GM can simply apply disadvantage.

With disadvantage, the player rolls 3d12 and keeps the highest two results. This reduces the success rate to roughly 16% for an untrained character, 28% for an apprentice, and 50% for an expert.

The expert with disadvantage is roughly comparable to a D&D character with a +10 modifier making a DC 21 check.

On the other hand, sometimes the GM wants to call for a check even when an action is relatively easy, because the result could still be interesting or meaningfully change the scene.

In that case, the GM can give the player advantage.

With advantage, the player rolls 3d12 and keeps the lowest two results. This raises the success rate to roughly 64.5% for an untrained character, 78% for an apprentice, and 91% for an expert.

My hope is that this gives newer GMs a simple way to adjust difficulty without getting lost in numbers or worrying about whether they picked the "correct" DC.

Players can also gain or grant advantage through different abilities and actions. Advantage and disadvantage can cancel each other out, giving players opportunities to actively improve their own chances or help their allies succeed.

Conclusion

That's essentially the core of AstraWeaver's resolution system:

Combine two numbers to create a Check Threshold(CT). Then roll 2d12. If the result is lower than the CT, it’s a success.

Most of the time, those numbers come from the character's five attributes. The GM chooses one, the player chooses the other, and together they form the CT.

In some special situations, one of those numbers can be replaced by something else, such as an NPC's mood or the current state of a scene.

Then, when the difficulty needs to change, advantage and disadvantage can modify the roll.

That's the basic framework.

There are obviously many more details hiding underneath it, but those are topics for future devlogs.

———

In the next devlog, I’ll dive deeper into CT and the numbers behind it: how I determined the attribute ranges and starting values, how the probability curve affects character progression, how I wanted starting characters to feel like novice heroes, and how I arrived at the current critical success system.
There’s quite a bit to unpack, so I’ll save it for the next post.
I also previously posted about CT and received some questions and feedback there, so I'll try to incorporate those discussions into the next post as well.
And I'll try not to make the next one read like a PhD dissertation.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Thank you for reading!

I was reading through this other post on AI accusations and some people have expectations that are beyond reasonable. In a world where half of the internet is written by AI they expect you to not even look in the direction of anything that was AI generated. Some claim that checking the google's AI section in search results should be disclosed. Others that just bouncing ideas off of AI is too much... I understand the issue of drawing a strict line between what should and shouldn't be disclosed as using the AI. How much AI is too much AI? And I'm not here to argue about it. I have my own stance on it which is very much anti AI and I'm not trying to excuse myself or anyone else.

I wrote this post to say that this kind of mentality is extremely counter productive. This toxicity can either push people away from being creative at all, since they get flack for smallest shit, or push them towards using AI even more since the requirements are impossible to avoid. If I'm gonna get blamed for AI either way, I can just as well use it. This war on AI that people are fighting on the backs of small creators that earn pennies from their hobbies doesn't lead anywhere.

The pressure is such that I opted for a new account as I fear this post could explode into a torrent of toxicity that I don't want to be associated with. I'm not saying not to call out blatant AI use. I'm not saying you should accept AI generated slop. But aim your rage appropriately. Support each other when people obviously created something with their own hands, even if they used AI as a tool a bit. Suggest them alternatives to AI instead of attacking them without compromise. And demand from big(ger) publishers to ditch AI. The ones that would actually take work from artists and writers. There are better ways to fight this war than to fight it among ourselves.

What is a big problem you perceive to exist in the rpg design space and how do you think your game solves it? I can be something specific to certain types of rpgs.

For me:

• His Majesty the Worm, I've long loved the ascetics of tarot and have on and off made many attempts at using it in RPGs most successfully as the basis for a magic system in an OSR game. Seeing how HMtW used tarot, and specifically the challenge phase combat mini game where you have a hand of cards to represent actions an initiative made me reevaluate my own games. TBH I've mostly ditched dice for tarot cards and am play testing the a new version using HMtW's system.

• Mausritter, that inventory system! I love the physicality of it, and before I ever heard of it I'd been tinkering with more physical character sheets almost akin to the player boards from a board game. Root, the board game, specifically was an inspiration for that. So definitely taking the physicality of it, and using inventory to track statuses, health etc. I know it's an Into the Odd thing, but Mausritter was the first one I played in person.

Honorable mentions to:

• Crows, it does so much of what I like and am aiming to do in my game, but it's just enough different and more ridged then I personally want but I love to see the village base building element. Something I had in my game and kept going back on forth on if it was a darling I needed to kill or not, felt validating seeing it put front and center in Crows.

• Seven-Part Pact, much like the physicality of Mausritter, but also the asymmetry of each member of the pact, chefs kiss. I'm a huge fan of the board game root, in case that wasn't clear. One of the goals of my game is to make different characters feel distinctly different, and play differently. In an earlier version I had different character types using different resolution mechanics, wizards use tarot cards, thieves used a dice pool where they could only add a certain number per turn. It was clunky but almost kinda worked, until it definitely didn't. Still think there is something there to be revisited.

I've rambled enough, interested to hear what games have influenced and shaped your work.

Hello again everyone!

Thanks to the feedback I got here before and from elsewhere, I've made quite a few changes to the book. Removed and added things, rules clarifications, and overal structure. There are still some things I want to do, but for now these were a cosiderable version change from 0.8 to 0.9 :)

https://exiledoracles.itch.io/fameandfortune

Thanks again for the feedback.

May your dice always roll true.

In my system, willpower is determined by three separate stats; Intelligence, Charisma and Toughness. I want each of these attributes to serve as a "saving throw" for a different kind of fear, induced by a different kind of creature.

The problem? I'm not sure how to divide sources of fear between these three characteristics. I was thinking of dividing enemies into Bullies (Toughness), Monsters (Intelligence) and Horrors (Charisma) but it doesn't quite sit right with me. Is there a more elegant way to do this, or should I give up on the idea altogether?

This is something im getting stumped on. I want there to be unique powers that players and game masters can use to underscore monster differences. A succubus who wields a greatsword is going to be a different threat than a succubus who uses hordes of lovers as mindless cannon fodder.

For the rest of this you need to understand how checks work. Its a mixed dice pool system. The dice size for different elements (your stats) is determined by your ancestry and the number of dice is determined by how many of each element you have. So you could have an attack that is 6d8 or 2d4+1d6+1d12+2d8.

Checks themselves have the format of X/Y>Z/W,A where x is the number of successes you need to spend to get Y result and then you need Z successes after to get W and A (if applicable). This is called a success track. It must be filled left to right and if you have successes after you reach the end it loops back to the start. So if you have 2/[w]>1/prone and you roll 4 successes you do [w]+knock the target prone and have 1 success left over. You cannot do 2x[w]. ([w] is weapon damage.)

Combat uses a tick speed initiative. So moves have a speed where 5 speed means you have to wait 5 ticks before your move triggers and 16 speed means you need to wait 16 ticks. Faster moves are weaker but you can switch strategies much faster than slow moves which are more devastating in power.

THIS IS NOT WHAT I NEED HELP WITH.

Just wanted to make that abundantly clear. I like it all of the above as it is. Im just putting it here so you understand what im asking.

During character creation you will pick your archetype and discipline (class and subclass). That will give you your complexity for your at will and prepared powers (prepared is once per day) as well as how many of each. Warriors dont have prepared powers.

So now lets put this all together and assume you are creating a power for you warrior with 10 complexity.

1. Determine your attacks speed. All effect costs are multiplied by this number.

(The reason this is a multiplier is because its balanced by being on a curve. If an 8 speed attack has 10 complexity a 16 speed attack might have 24 complexity. This is a reward for giving up opportunity costs. Likewise a 4 speed attack might only have 4 power because you have more opportunities to change your strategy.)

1. Determine shape. Another multiplier but its only for spellcasters, spellblades, and monsters. Warriors just get single target. (Warrior AOE comes from magic weapons and alchemy.)

(The reason this is a multiplier is because area attacks are more time efficient than single target at a non-linear rate.)

1. Determine an effect. This is where you spend your complexity. This can be anything from damage to debuffs or buffs. Each effect has its own cost because status conditions and damage arent equally as valuable.

2. Determine the number of dice needed to activate that effect. Do you need 1 success? 2? 4? Another multiplier because getting 4 successes is so much harder than 1 on 6 dice. (2+ effects on same X successes will have a premium placed on them though im not sure how to balance it quite yet.)

3. Repeat 3 and 4 until you no longer have complexity remaining. Placing these effects along a success track. (Static effects that are always on and not decided by dice such as range are separate and tied to either the weapon or bought at a flat complexity rate.)

So to purchase a basic effect you have the following degrees of freedom that affect the complexity cost:

- Speed

- Shape (sometimes)

- Number of dice

- Effect

I have no idea how to even represent these in one or even several referencable tables.