I’m a bit confused about why this system claims to be based on the classic x-in-6 mechanic.
It’s stated in the blurb, and again in the text. Then the text describes a roll-over mechanic, which x-in-6 is not (it’s roll-under, that’s why it’s called “x-in-6”). Then when it finally describes the actual DAD6 mechanic, it’s a dice pool. Completely different.
I wanted to create a generic task resolution system that I could plug into any game that I might be running. I started off with x in 6 (my base). From there I chose 1 in 6 as my baseline. Great, but I prefer a high number = good, low number = bad approach so I flip it to a target of a 6 instead of a 1 (still 1 in 6, still x in 6, in my mind).
Now, I decide to, instead of modulating the success range (ie. 1 in 6, 2 in 6) to express either difficulty of the challenge or levels of skill, modify the die roll for skill. A low level character with a skill would be +1 to their roll, giving them an effective 2 in 6 chance, even if I am expressing it slightly differently.
But wait! What is all the dice pool business about? I’m glad you asked because another inspiration for this system is the troop combat system from Chainmail which uses a d6 dice pool! Troop combat is, obviously a combat system, not a generic task resolution system, but it uses an ascending x in 6 chance. Their dice pool system is interesting but it can be complicated so I tried to formulate something a bit different on those lines.
Now you could say, well gee, your system is much closer to that than x-in-6, you should have said that instead. And my answer is: maybe? But inspiration isn’t a clean thing. The other element is that, for my audience, and the audience I perceive this framework will be most interesting to, x-in-6 as a starting context is more useful than Chainmail troop combat. I could have laid this all out in the document itself but I didn’t think it was worth the word count. I thought “based on” pretty well had that covered. I started with x-in-6 and I ended up here. If you legitimately felt bait-and-switched by my phrasing, I sincerely apologize.
