Let's come up with some ways to generate greater verisimilitude in skill checks. D&D usually focuses on Pass/Fail, which for me, doesn't give enough information. i want to know how well or poorly i did. i'm a huge fan of the Storyteller system (OWoD), so that's the source of my inspiration.
Here are some models i have.
5s Above - For each 5 above the DC, increment success level. If the DC is 15 the break down is:
1: Autofail
2 - 14: Fail
15 - 19: Nominal
20 - 24: Good
25 +: Excellent
This is the most basic. i don't like the math involved, and the math is even more annoying when the DC isn't a multiple of 5. Also, it favors the die roll fairly heavily. Not sure how to generate a Botch result on one die. In a pinch i guess it would be fine.
Series - This is a series of checks to determine degree. The description makes it seem more complex than it is in practice.
Roll One
1: Autofail, goto Recovery Check
2 - <DC: Simple Failure, stop rolling
≥DC: Nominal Success, roll again
Roll Two
1 - <DC: Keep Nominal Succes, stop rolling
≥DC: Good Success, roll again
Roll Three
1 - <DC: Keep Good Success, stop rolling
≥DC: Excellent Success, stop rolling
Recovery Check
<DC: Botch, stop rolling
≥DC: Simple Failure, stop rolling
Options
- Increment the DC with each roll by two, this will reduce the number of Excellent Successes. High skill characters, like my bard will beat DC 15 three times in a row with ease on Streetwise and Diplomacy. 15, 17, 19 would be another matter.
- Count a Natural 20 as two degrees of success and keep rolling
- Allow a Natural 20 on the Recovery Check to keep rolling for successes, this replicates scenes in movies where the hero totally screws up, but still manages to pull it out of the hat.
i like this because it favors high skills over high dice. i like that it could build tension. It might seem like extra work to some players.
Pool - The idea here is to replicate the OWoD system... sort of.
Roll 3 d20s.
Determine the outcome of each die
1: Botch
2 - <DC: Failure
≥DC: Success
IF there are 0 successes and any Botches, the result is Botch.
IF there are 0 successes and 0 Botches, the result is Failure.
For each success, increment the degree of success. (Botch and Failure dice don't matter if there are any successes)
Options
- For opposed rolls, have sides roll pools against each other, most successes win. The DCs are 10 + The other side's bonus. Break ties by giving the side with the highest bonus an extra success, or by rolling another die for each side. You could roll the pools in pairs. i roll one, you roll one. That might create some tension. Canceling the bonuses against each other can reduce the math. +7 vs. +5 would become +2 vs. +0.
Example: Imagine if two bards were dueling banjos, Bob plays his bit, Alan plays his. Bob gets 3 successes and Alan gets 2, the audience declares Bob the winner. Bob's three successes means that he played Excellently, but his victory over Alan was Nominal.
This is a bit more like OWoD with the pool. But it relies on the bonus to the roll instead of die number. It would be the most foreign to people who have never used pools.
Arm Wrestling - Imagine two characters pitting strength against strength. If equally matched the position of their arms could go back and forth until someone eventually becomes tired. It's an open ended contested roll. The end result is pass/fail, which makes it different than the others listed here.
Increments
3 - Side A, B about to lose
2 - Side A
1 - Side A
0 - Balance, the starting position
1 - Side B
2 - Side B
3 - Side B, A about to lose
A rolls against 10 + B's bonus
B rolls against 10 + A's bonus
Process
- Sides roll against each other at the same time
- If both succeed or fail, nothing changes, roll again
- If one succeeds and the other does not, move one increment in that side's favor
- The 4th increment in either direction means that side wins
OR
Higher roll wins an increment in their direction. You can break ties with the higher bonus, or just have no progress in either direction.
Options
- Count natural 20s as two successes
- Count a natural 1 as a negative success
- Set a limit on the number of rolls and take the degree of success for one side from wherever it happens to be. If the third roll shows 2 for Side B, Side B has a Good result, Side A fails.
Player: Blushing Jack wants to seduce the Baroness.
GM: Interesting... she wants you to kill her husband, the Baron.
Player: Yikes, things turned film noir all the sudden. OK. If I win she will run away with me and have a tawdry affair.
GM: If i win, you'll kill her husband.
We can use several of the systems here.
The Serial model represents Jack trying to convince her of each part of what he wants. To have sex with him now, DC 15. To fall in love with him, DC 17. And to run away with him, DC 19.
The Pool would be that he lays out his argument all at once and rolls. i suppose you could make it a series of rolls to make it dramatic. But it wouldn't affect the outcome.
Failure - A simple failure means you didn't get what you want. You might be able to try again, maybe not. In this case, the Baroness is not persuaded to bed Blushing Jack or anything else.
Botch - The GM gets to be sadistic. Not only does she not do the matress mambo, she is deeply offended (or pretends to be) and screams for her jealous, armed husband.
Nominal - You kinda sorta get what you want. Jack gets laid and they part company and never speak again.
Good - You get what you want. Jack and the Baroness make mad passionate love, and she falls in love with him.
Excellent - You get what you wanted and more. She's in love with Jack and starts packing for her escape into a life away from court and her awful husband.
Arm Wrestling would represent how each side is vacillating on what the other wants as they argue back and forth. The GM could give bonuses for RP of player. If Jack compares her to a summer's day, +2. If Jack says, "I'll never rule the Barony with you!", +2 to her side. By agreeing to 3 pairs of rolls each side has a chance of achieving some level of success (instead of merely winning or losing).
But Only If - i'm ripping this off from an indie game with a name that eludes me. Instead of rolling, the sides (player and DM, most likely) take turns offering conditions.
Jack: "Let us swive with great abandon!" (and the player adds) "But only if...".
Baroness: "If you will promise to rid me of the Baron", but only if....
Jack:"You run away with me, far from the court intrigues and your pug ugly husband" but only if....
Baroness: "No, you must kill him or surely he will kill us both for our sin" but only if....
Jack (player): But only if the Baron catches in the act.
Baroness (GM): OK. The baron enters the room.
It's a process of writing what will happen in the story that involves asking what it would take to get the other side to agree. In this story, Jack would not kill the Baron in cold blood and the Baroness wouldn't leave. The final agreement is that Jack and the Baroness do the nasty, the Baron catches them and Jack has to fight the Baron wearing nothing but his trade mark blush.
Note that the both sides can make offers of things that involve other characters and events. You could have the fight with the Baron in the same way.
"I stab him in his black heart!"
"But only if seeing her husband die breaks her infatuation with Jack!"
Jacks player must decide to lose her or lose the fight somehow. Perhaps by saying "No, but the Baron wounds me severely and throws me into the moat". The GM could agree to that... leaving the Baroness interested in Jack and Jack leaving in dire need of a cleric.
You can bring dice into it by having the sides make rolls against each other. The higher roll gets to determine who has the upper hand in the negotiation. Leaving the dice out of it can make for a more interesting story.
You can play a whole game with that system.
Fail - Trap remains a threat
Botch - Trap explodes; harming your rogue most painfully
Nominal - Trap is deactivated, but resets... you'll have to disarm it again on the way out.
Good - The trap is deactivated. You can reset it or disable it if you like.
Excellent - The trap is your plaything. You can scavenge it for parts, reset it or what have you.
Researching an Artifact
Fail - "I've never heard of it"
Botch - "It was invented by the elves and hidden in a cave to the north"
Nominal - "It was invented by the dwarves to excavate mines"
Good - "It's in a cave to the south"
Excellent - "Look for the cave under the oak tree. When you find it, wear gloves lest it read your mind and blast a hole in your party"
Questions for you
Here are some models i have.
5s Above - For each 5 above the DC, increment success level. If the DC is 15 the break down is:
1: Autofail
2 - 14: Fail
15 - 19: Nominal
20 - 24: Good
25 +: Excellent
This is the most basic. i don't like the math involved, and the math is even more annoying when the DC isn't a multiple of 5. Also, it favors the die roll fairly heavily. Not sure how to generate a Botch result on one die. In a pinch i guess it would be fine.
Series - This is a series of checks to determine degree. The description makes it seem more complex than it is in practice.
Roll One
1: Autofail, goto Recovery Check
2 - <DC: Simple Failure, stop rolling
≥DC: Nominal Success, roll again
Roll Two
1 - <DC: Keep Nominal Succes, stop rolling
≥DC: Good Success, roll again
Roll Three
1 - <DC: Keep Good Success, stop rolling
≥DC: Excellent Success, stop rolling
Recovery Check
<DC: Botch, stop rolling
≥DC: Simple Failure, stop rolling
Options
- Increment the DC with each roll by two, this will reduce the number of Excellent Successes. High skill characters, like my bard will beat DC 15 three times in a row with ease on Streetwise and Diplomacy. 15, 17, 19 would be another matter.
- Count a Natural 20 as two degrees of success and keep rolling
- Allow a Natural 20 on the Recovery Check to keep rolling for successes, this replicates scenes in movies where the hero totally screws up, but still manages to pull it out of the hat.
i like this because it favors high skills over high dice. i like that it could build tension. It might seem like extra work to some players.
Pool - The idea here is to replicate the OWoD system... sort of.
Roll 3 d20s.
Determine the outcome of each die
1: Botch
2 - <DC: Failure
≥DC: Success
IF there are 0 successes and any Botches, the result is Botch.
IF there are 0 successes and 0 Botches, the result is Failure.
For each success, increment the degree of success. (Botch and Failure dice don't matter if there are any successes)
Options
- For opposed rolls, have sides roll pools against each other, most successes win. The DCs are 10 + The other side's bonus. Break ties by giving the side with the highest bonus an extra success, or by rolling another die for each side. You could roll the pools in pairs. i roll one, you roll one. That might create some tension. Canceling the bonuses against each other can reduce the math. +7 vs. +5 would become +2 vs. +0.
Example: Imagine if two bards were dueling banjos, Bob plays his bit, Alan plays his. Bob gets 3 successes and Alan gets 2, the audience declares Bob the winner. Bob's three successes means that he played Excellently, but his victory over Alan was Nominal.
This is a bit more like OWoD with the pool. But it relies on the bonus to the roll instead of die number. It would be the most foreign to people who have never used pools.
Arm Wrestling - Imagine two characters pitting strength against strength. If equally matched the position of their arms could go back and forth until someone eventually becomes tired. It's an open ended contested roll. The end result is pass/fail, which makes it different than the others listed here.
Increments
3 - Side A, B about to lose
2 - Side A
1 - Side A
0 - Balance, the starting position
1 - Side B
2 - Side B
3 - Side B, A about to lose
A rolls against 10 + B's bonus
B rolls against 10 + A's bonus
Process
- Sides roll against each other at the same time
- If both succeed or fail, nothing changes, roll again
- If one succeeds and the other does not, move one increment in that side's favor
- The 4th increment in either direction means that side wins
OR
Higher roll wins an increment in their direction. You can break ties with the higher bonus, or just have no progress in either direction.
Options
- Count natural 20s as two successes
- Count a natural 1 as a negative success
- Set a limit on the number of rolls and take the degree of success for one side from wherever it happens to be. If the third roll shows 2 for Side B, Side B has a Good result, Side A fails.
The variable result models above are based on the idea of the player and GM negotiating outcomes.
Player: Blushing Jack wants to seduce the Baroness.
GM: Interesting... she wants you to kill her husband, the Baron.
Player: Yikes, things turned film noir all the sudden. OK. If I win she will run away with me and have a tawdry affair.
GM: If i win, you'll kill her husband.
We can use several of the systems here.
The Serial model represents Jack trying to convince her of each part of what he wants. To have sex with him now, DC 15. To fall in love with him, DC 17. And to run away with him, DC 19.
The Pool would be that he lays out his argument all at once and rolls. i suppose you could make it a series of rolls to make it dramatic. But it wouldn't affect the outcome.
Failure - A simple failure means you didn't get what you want. You might be able to try again, maybe not. In this case, the Baroness is not persuaded to bed Blushing Jack or anything else.
Botch - The GM gets to be sadistic. Not only does she not do the matress mambo, she is deeply offended (or pretends to be) and screams for her jealous, armed husband.
Nominal - You kinda sorta get what you want. Jack gets laid and they part company and never speak again.
Good - You get what you want. Jack and the Baroness make mad passionate love, and she falls in love with him.
Excellent - You get what you wanted and more. She's in love with Jack and starts packing for her escape into a life away from court and her awful husband.
Arm Wrestling would represent how each side is vacillating on what the other wants as they argue back and forth. The GM could give bonuses for RP of player. If Jack compares her to a summer's day, +2. If Jack says, "I'll never rule the Barony with you!", +2 to her side. By agreeing to 3 pairs of rolls each side has a chance of achieving some level of success (instead of merely winning or losing).
But Only If - i'm ripping this off from an indie game with a name that eludes me. Instead of rolling, the sides (player and DM, most likely) take turns offering conditions.
Jack: "Let us swive with great abandon!" (and the player adds) "But only if...".
Baroness: "If you will promise to rid me of the Baron", but only if....
Jack:"You run away with me, far from the court intrigues and your pug ugly husband" but only if....
Baroness: "No, you must kill him or surely he will kill us both for our sin" but only if....
Jack (player): But only if the Baron catches in the act.
Baroness (GM): OK. The baron enters the room.
It's a process of writing what will happen in the story that involves asking what it would take to get the other side to agree. In this story, Jack would not kill the Baron in cold blood and the Baroness wouldn't leave. The final agreement is that Jack and the Baroness do the nasty, the Baron catches them and Jack has to fight the Baron wearing nothing but his trade mark blush.
Note that the both sides can make offers of things that involve other characters and events. You could have the fight with the Baron in the same way.
"I stab him in his black heart!"
"But only if seeing her husband die breaks her infatuation with Jack!"
Jacks player must decide to lose her or lose the fight somehow. Perhaps by saying "No, but the Baron wounds me severely and throws me into the moat". The GM could agree to that... leaving the Baroness interested in Jack and Jack leaving in dire need of a cleric.
You can bring dice into it by having the sides make rolls against each other. The higher roll gets to determine who has the upper hand in the negotiation. Leaving the dice out of it can make for a more interesting story.
You can play a whole game with that system.
Disarming a Trap
Fail - Trap remains a threat
Botch - Trap explodes; harming your rogue most painfully
Nominal - Trap is deactivated, but resets... you'll have to disarm it again on the way out.
Good - The trap is deactivated. You can reset it or disable it if you like.
Excellent - The trap is your plaything. You can scavenge it for parts, reset it or what have you.
Researching an Artifact
Fail - "I've never heard of it"
Botch - "It was invented by the elves and hidden in a cave to the north"
Nominal - "It was invented by the dwarves to excavate mines"
Good - "It's in a cave to the south"
Excellent - "Look for the cave under the oak tree. When you find it, wear gloves lest it read your mind and blast a hole in your party"
Questions for you
What systems have you used to do this sort of work?
How can i improve the systems listed here? How can i explain them better?
What sort are the probability differences between the various models?
How can i improve the systems listed here? How can i explain them better?
What sort are the probability differences between the various models?
