Game Design Masterclass: Going Diceless

While they are pretty (oh so pretty) you don’t actually need dice to play a role-playing game. If we don’t mind the Gamemaster fiddling with results to improve the story (when players do it, that’s just cheating) how much do we really need to roll something? Some GMs say they only roll as they love the sound the dice make. So if you are fudging anyway, why not go the whole hog and be open about not using dice at all?

amberdicelessrpg.jpg

In 1991Eric Wujcik went that far with the Amber Diceless RPG, a game that blew my mind when I first came across it. Amber is based on the series of novels of the same name by Roger Zelazny. In the setting, only the feudal castle Amber and its lands are truly real, and the many other worlds (ours included) are mere reflections of it. The noble family who rule compete constantly for control of Amber, as nothing else in the multiverse truly matters.

While there are no dice used in Amber, it’s not entirely fair to call it systemless or entirely narrative. Resolving conflicts is done by comparing the attributes of those involved (Warfare, Psyche, Strength and Endurance). But these are not usually rated by a number. For the most part they are rated between the player characters as who is the best. Unless someone cheats in some way, the best person will win any conflict. When it comes to NPCs the GM simply decides secretly if the NPC is better or worse than the PC in question.

It’s quite common in narrative games for players to get stuck for ideas. One thing dice are good at doing is forcing a result. But Amber offers some basic options players can use to get clues about how good their opponent is. For instance, in a sword fight you might begin by declaring you are going all out to defend yourself. If you seem to be holding your own you might be pretty evenly matched. If your opponent is still landing the odd blow you are clearly in trouble. Every scene is a back and forth between players and Gamemaster until a conclusion is reached.

While Amber can be a little tricky to find these days, the system was revised by Rite Publishing with a new setting as Lords of Gossamer and Shadow. But another well known adaptation of the system is Jenna Moran’s Nobilis where each character is the embodiment of an aspect of the universe. Nobilis takes the system another step further by putting some points to the character’s attributes. This lets you ask a simple question each time they face opposition – ‘do you want to win enough to spend a point?’ Doing so is pretty much a guarantee of a win, but you only have so many points to use. There are also elements of diceless play to be found in many other dice-based RPGs that tilt towards the narrative like Smallville and Invisible Sun.

You may have noticed by now that the characters in most diceless games are a little more powerful than most player characters. They are often Gods or Lords and Ladies of the universe. It’s this level of play that suits diceless best as it allows you to ignore all the small stuff. Scenes are about shaping the universe not picking a lock. You can assume the characters are all potent enough to just worry about the big issues where it is worth spending their points or working out how to deal with the bad guy.

While a diceless game is a lot of fun, it will test your imagination whether you are a player or a Gamemaster. It can take some getting used to. In most games the players are used to the dice defending them from the Gamemaster. The GM sets a problem and the players escape it by succeeding at a dice roll. While it might not always look like it, dice are the player’s only defense.

When you first play a diceless game it is easy to fall into the trap of playing as you would with dice, and just making up what happens. This generally leads to the GM doing all the talking and trying to figure out results for everything. If a pit opens up in front of the characters, who falls in? You can’t roll so it’s the GM deciding to potentially kill your character off. There are no dice to protect you by making a Dexterity roll or the like.

So the key to running a diceless game is actually player input. Instead of waiting for the GM to interpret the dice roll the players should be the ones to decide what happens to their characters when presented with a situation. When presented with a pit, one might describe leaping across, but another might decide they’ve almost fallen in and are clinging onto the edge for dear life.

It’s a tricky style of play to master as it goes against a lot of habits you never knew you’d picked up rolling dice. For this reason alone it is a good idea to try it at least once and see how your group reacts. It can be liberating but also a lot of hard work. Without any clues from the dice as to how you’ve done, you have to make those decisions yourself.

While diceless might not be for everyone – and I’m not suggesting it’s innately any better than using dice – it is also a good way for a player to train as a GM. It lets the player invest in the story and make decisions about their character’s adventure that are usually left to the GM. Essentially it teaches how to play with everyone writing the story as a whole, rather than just their character’s part in it. As a final note, it’s also a pretty good way to play an RPG on a long car journey where you don’t have a surface to roll dice on and the driver can’t keep looking at their character sheet.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Andrew Peregrine

Andrew Peregrine

timbannock

Adventurer
Supporter
When my cousin and I published DeScriptors we began with a one page "word-bidding" diceless game and loved how the wordplay involved encouraged creative description and put a lot of the ball in the player's court for driving the story forward. More importantly, it ensured a story arc: a player character won't end a session with the same descriptive traits they started with.

But for those who think diceless means a simple system, or something that can't be made robust, we were able to build in dozens of expansions, options, and variant rules in DeScriptors: Definitive Edition. We were actually really surprised how much the word-bidding system could be flexed to come up with separate systems for things like magic, one-use items, and escalating contests.

If you wanna see something more than just uber-powered characters in diceless games, give it a look. There's a PWYW version so you can get the base system free. Definitive adds something like 20 pages of options, a full example of play, and a FAQ-style GM advice section that take about improv.

There's also an Actual Play for several sessions on the Worldbuilder's Anvil podcast.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Von Ether

Legend
It's "story' vs. "game".

If you want to tell a story, write your book. No dice needed.

Want to play an RPG, randomizers like dice inform the group regarding actions.

Reading about all the complaints of railroady adventures or how some GMs simply have a line of encounters that happen in order regardless of the direction the party took in a dungeon, it seems that randomizers give the group the illusion of a choice of actions.

As a side note, I frequently run Cypher/Numenera where the dice are fully in the open and the rolls are all by the players (on the enemy turn, the players do defense rolls instead of attack rolls.) Which to some would seem to be the complete opposite of Amber, but they share some of the same GMing skills. Both work and my players in both games had great times.

Some days I'm tempted to make D&D have all player facing rolls.
 
Last edited:

Corone

Adventurer
While I agree that the key is player input, I find the example makes a pretty big assumption. One way to play is that players decide what their characters want to do, and exercise fiat over the outcome. Another way is that players just decide what their characters want to do. It would be strange for a character to want to almost fall into a pit (except as some outlandish gambit) so I would say that the norm for RPG is that the player chose that they wanted to cross, and it is something the DM knew about the pit that sucked them into it.

We might not be speaking about the norm, but then we are talking about a game that is not just diceless, not just system-light, but also shared-fiat. Which is fine, but it should not be necessarily conflated with diceless. It is one option.

In my experience you decide to fall into the pit because you think that would be an interesting result for your character, or that it is just what you think would happen (they are such a clutch there is no way they get out of it). Each player becomes the GM of their own narrative to a large extent. Its this gear change that is the key, and its a very different style of play.

You can play with everyone looking to the GM to decide what the non existent dice would have rolled. Its how I first played these sort of games. But I found that exhausting and not very collaborative as the GM sets the scene and then told everyone how it worked out.

I think 'diceless' isn't quite a fair title for these games as they do more than just take away dice. But they aren't systemless by any means either as there is still a lot of rules and guidance for how to decide any outcome. As its the name Amber took I feel it only fair to go with Eric Wujik's title as he knows more than me :)
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Yes, or more generally speaking, ordering principles. Roshambo can play a part in that (this element trumps that element) but also one can use methods like resource expenditure and ranking attributes to help decide.
The Roshambo elements I think of as just one factor (not absolutes).. but rather added to whatever other resource expenditures or ability factors. In MURPG ability determines the stones you have to allocate and you spend stones to perform actions ie its an immediate effort expenditure divided up on things you want to accomplish or pay attention to ... modify with some roshambo effects like in the following and its a lot richer.
.
1588466258958.png

 
Last edited:


Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
I think 'diceless' isn't quite a fair title for these games as they do more than just take away dice. But they aren't systemless by any means either as there is still a lot of rules and guidance for how to decide any outcome.
I like the term "Decision Driven Gaming" - that way you describe it based on what it is instead of what it isn't.
 


Never got the chance to play Amber, but I love Everway too. Very evocative game.
I have Everway too, and love some of the concepts although it always felt a bit underdeveloped to me.

Its worth noting that while the Tarot-like cards make the game diceless, certainly, they are still usually distributed randomly (shuffling the deck). While the reading of the cards (Fate) can be interpreted subjectively and you could just adjudicate situations without cards by comparing stats (Karma) or GM fiat (Drama), the game is still basically set up with an inbuilt randomising process.

Having said that, I have often used the Everway deck in conjunction with other systems -you simply distribute a number of cards, face down, to each player at the start of the session and allow them to turn over a card at any chosen event. The interpretation of the card - which is still either positive or negative - can then be used to aid the description of the outcome or change of circumstance for the player. Just like a tarot-reading in a sense.

Amber also had a reference to this sort of thing with it’s ‘Trump’ power, which involved the character having knowledge and power from interpreting cards. Other games that used cards in their system too include Ars Magica (Whimsey cards), Lace & steel (for dueling), Castle Falkenstein (for everything), TSRs Marvel Superheroes and Dragonlance games (from the 1990s), Deadlands (for initiative and magic), and also later games like Fate that also can use them as an option.
 
Last edited:

clearstream

(He, Him)
In my experience you decide to fall into the pit because you think that would be an interesting result for your character, or that it is just what you think would happen (they are such a clutch there is no way they get out of it). Each player becomes the GM of their own narrative to a large extent. Its this gear change that is the key, and its a very different style of play.
I do understand that it can be satisfying to play that way. What I am saying is that it is not inherent to diceless games that they must be played that way. A group could play a diceless game with player fiat over narrative outcomes, or equally they could play it in the more traditional fashion of DM fiat over narrative outcomes.

You can play with everyone looking to the GM to decide what the non existent dice would have rolled. Its how I first played these sort of games. But I found that exhausting and not very collaborative as the GM sets the scene and then told everyone how it worked out.
I feel like those are reasonable motives. For me, it was not at all exhausting to exercise fiat over outcomes. As a DM one does feel a sense that too hesitate is to be lost! As for if it feels more collaborative, what I found is that my players' actions inspired the narrative: they drove it forward. Not because they decided the outcome of their actions, but because they took a lively interest in choosing those actions. As protagonists, they don't decide the world they find themselves in, but the crucial thing about protagonists is what they try to do. That forcefully propels the plot.

I think 'diceless' isn't quite a fair title for these games as they do more than just take away dice. But they aren't systemless by any means either as there is still a lot of rules and guidance for how to decide any outcome. As its the name Amber took I feel it only fair to go with Eric Wujik's title as he knows more than me :)
I agree. Diceless is one attribute among others that include system-weight, player-fiat and fantasticality.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top