Borrowing Mechanics: Push Your Luck.

[@MansMan42069]

Finally, the full video!

[@Ched80]

One push your luck game I enjoy is Zombie Dice. Pull 3 dice, roll and count up your brains and shotgun blasts. You can stop at any point and cash in your brains, but once you accumulate 3 blasts you get nada. I like it because it's short. I totally agree with Glenn; watching other players' turns is dull, but your own turn is wonderfully tense. I've always thought push your luck might work well for item interaction in a minis game. I.e. searching for some juicy loot in the ruins. Do you push to grab something else and risk losing what you've found? Also thought it might make an interesting fighting mechanism. Where the players' roll hits and saves at the same time sequentially, but if you bust you miss/don't save.

[@RuleofCarnage]

I think as a resolution mechanic it would slow things up too much. You'd really only want a few push your luck moments in a game. I can imagine it for loot searching as you suggest, though you'd want it to happen a set number of times.

[@colinmacmillan2944]

'Theatre at the Table' - that's what I'm looking for!

[@grimskald]

Go For It! In Bloodbowl is the quintessential push your luck in minis games. When successful, it is somewhat helpful, when it fails - catastrophic.

[@RuleofCarnage]

Again I don't know because in Bloodbowl you are still forced to stop even if you're successful, which I think is possibly not part of push your luck.

[@grimskald]

@@RuleofCarnage true. What is that called then, push your luck lite?

[@RuleofCarnage]

@@grimskald If I had to give it a single term I guess I'd simply call it risk reward.

[@MrLigonater]

So one thing for the Ganesha Games push your luck system is it feel more like pushing your luck on your turn in aggregate instead of just for each unit activation (which is where the push your luck mechanic actually exists). So in many ways the ‘worst’ outcome that likely occurs is not if you loose a turn because you roll badly on too many dice, but if you are pushing your luck on multiple dice rolls to try to pull something off, but then you fail halfway through. Then you have half your units out of position when it’s your opponent’s turn. So even though there is an upward limit on how much you can push your luck for any given unit activation, the fact that you are making that type of push your luck decision over and over again in your turn makes the push your luck element feel central to the game. I think in minis games, a push your luck mechanic is nice to have as an option as an alternative to the “safe option.” For instance, I think it would be interesting and appropriate for there to be an option to either, advance into melee sensibly, or berserk into the enemy ranks where you may do a lot of damage get stabbed without the chance to block or whatever. -> that said, I imagine that could very quickly become a basic part of the calculations for a game. ‘I’m going to push my luck with just this one guy to see how far he gets and accept that he is just going to die.’ And if that is the case, does it really work like push your luck?

[@JC-vg9zw]

Good points about the Ganesha system - and when you end up with units out of position, your opponents are incentivised to push THEIR luck to try to exploit the mess.

[@tritarch6687]

I wonder if this will incur more moon landing debates, lol.

[@treesandgeeking]

I find this directors cut a bit self indulgent compared to the original release length

[@RuleofCarnage]

I enjoyed the Push Your Luck video before it was cool.

[@madluper]

Second!

[@JC-vg9zw]

Good discussion, as ever. The Ganesha activation system (in Song of Blades of Heroes, Mutants & Death Ray Guns et al) strikes me as an exceptionally elegant use of "push your luck" (or risk/reward). I find it doesn't typically end up as "two rolls as the default" because it's so situational - and so dependent on the quality of the troops and whether they're well led. At the start of a game, you might well want to play it safe (one roll/automatic activation) with poor-quality troops, so that you can have them advance steadily en masse, perhaps allowing a more potent character to go last and take a risk-free triple roll (e.g. a mass of Q4 goblins creeping up while a wolf-riding champion charges towards the foe). But better-quality opposition (e.g. Q2 elves) might want to take a much more dynamic approach from the get-go. Only if pretty much everyone is Q3 are you likely to get the 'two-roll default' at the start of the game. The other thing is that the Ganesha rules do lots of clever things with the activation system. A key one is the Ambush rule: an 'ambush' - i.e. an attack by an assailant that the defender couldn't see at the start of the assailant's activation - earns a +1 bonus, which is a big deal in the opposed-D6 DBA-style combat system. Generally, you need the full three activations to pull that off: two to move round a corner and a third to attack. Similarly, the 'power blow' reduces the defender's Combat score by 1 - even more advantageous than an Ambush - but requires two activations, plus a third if you're not already in melee. The 'aimed shot' rule does the same for missile fire. So again, there's a built-in incentive to push your luck. Then you have the way the activation system interlocks with certain special rules - Leader, most obviously, but also things like Gregarious (used for kobolds and rat-men in the sample lists). Because group activations allow a body of troops to act in concert (one activation roll for the lot), they can be very effective. But they can also lead to low-quality troops surging forward at the sound of the bugle or crack of the whip, only to outrun their Leader's command range. That can create interesting situations down the line. The Gregarious trait amplifies this by making typically low-quality troops especially effective in group activations - incentivising three-dice rolls at the same time as upping the risk of outrunning the leader. That's all on top of scenario-based and situational incentives to push your luck. It's very well thought out, I think, and probably a key reason for Song of Blades enduring so long (there can't be many indy skirmish games that are flourishing after 17 years). Have you seen the Advanced version of Song of Blades? That takes the push-your-luck aspect further by giving the opponent the chance to react (i.e. attempt a single-die activation) for every failed activation roll. If there are two or more, the opponent can choose to seize the initiative as in the standard game or just take more reactions. It really powers up the risk/reward calculus - although it's best with slightly smaller warbands than standard Song of Blades and in two-player games (the basic game works well with up to six players, we've found).