D&D General Hot Take: Uncertainty Makes D&D Better

[Neonchameleon]

It would be helpful to know which "'story' games" and "cinematic type storytelling games" are being described here.

When I think of "story games", or non-trad-type games, I think of Prince Valiant, Cthulhu Dark, Wuthering Heights, Burning Wheel, Torchbearer, Marvel Heroic RP/Cortex+ Heroic, Agon, In A Wicked Age . . . and none of them (at least in my experience) remotely fits these descriptions.

I think this is borne out by my actual play posts.

To me there's a huge difference between storygames and storytelling games. There is a system called the Storytelling system and another called the Storyteller system (I forget which is which); they are the systems used in the White Wolf games like Vampire: the Masquerade, Vampire: the Requiem, or Exalted. Fundamentally I find that in the micro the Storytellx system is little different to D&D in that it's a fairly simple pass/fail system (although at least hits matter) with a lot of mechanics that don't add to much. And in the macro they lead to 90s style railroads and tightly controlled adventure paths much of the time.

Meanwhile Storygames came out of the basic impulse "We want to do what the White Wolf games promise but almost never deliver on". Not an adventure path to be seen in any storygame I can think of. The macro outcome is intentionally utterly uncertain outside one shots - and part of the joy of one shots is that death and failure are both much more on the line.

How so?

Player rolls poorly to pick a lock and I narrate it as a lock that has the character stumped. Next lock, player rolls really well and the narration points out how easy that lock was.

No bind, no contradiction. Why? Because obviously those two locks weren't the same design or manufacture; and that too is trivially easy to narrate.

And it's a distinction without a meaningful difference. You're just slapping a coat of paint over the top and trying to convince me that it's a different building. The thing that matters is does the lock get picked? Does the coat of paint have a non-zero effect in sprucing up the building? Yes. Will it change the size, layout, or shape? Not in the slightest.

Specifically, uncertainty in potential results. Swinginess. Random happenings because the dice get a mind of their own. That sort of thing.

I have played and like some "story" games, but one thing many of them lack is uncertainty. Their mechanics tend to favor participants being able to say things that become true in the fiction (even if they don't call it that).

And even if I've already replied to the OP about how success with consequences is very common in Storygames I missed a huge point here; you're decrying a huge source of uncertainty. In D&D there is one player who controls the world (the DM). One player who writes or at least runs the dungeon (the DM). One player who has a lot of knowledge and a lot of certainty.

Meanwhile in what you are describing there isn't just one player with the ability to say things that become true - but five or six. Which means that we have a situation where everyone is throwing in their own recipies and creating uncertainty. It's a lot less certain than D&D because of it.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm surprised you're advocating for Schroedinger's lock manufacture.

If the player/PC asks before or during the pick locks attempt whether the lock is the same as the last one I'll answer the question then. If not, a reasonable assumption is that no two locks are the same unless told otherwise, if for no other reason than they each have a unique key.

That said, 99% of the time this level of detail isn't given in the module or prep or whatever, so the DM not only has to wing it but has free rein to do so. Same thing about which way a typical dungeon door opens - it's a rare module that mentions this, and one of the very few I've seen that did got it all wrong, thusly:

"Unless stated otherwise, handles and hinges are always on the left".

Think about it...

So, when asked "Which way does the door open?", which is a quite reasonable thing the PCs are going to want to know, the DM has to wing it - and then either note it down or draw it on the dungeon map for when the PCs use that door again.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

This is exactly why any of our attempts to replace that d20 with 2d10 or 3d6 failed. When the outcome is 95% determined, rolling is not that fun anymore...

 

[Lanefan]

And it's a distinction without a meaningful difference. You're just slapping a coat of paint over the top and trying to convince me that it's a different building. The thing that matters is does the lock get picked? Does the coat of paint have a non-zero effect in sprucing up the building? Yes. Will it change the size, layout, or shape? Not in the slightest.

If all you care about is the raw mechanics then yes, does the lock get picked is all that matters. But some of us also care about the flavour or colour or whatever term you want to give it that in both imagination and narration overlays those mechanics.

In fact, that it's a coat of paint is the whole point: it takes the raw mechanics and turns them into something the imagination can get hold of.

 

[Aldarc]

It would be helpful to know which "'story' games" and "cinematic type storytelling games" are being described here.

When I think of "story games", or non-trad-type games, I think of Prince Valiant, Cthulhu Dark, Wuthering Heights, Burning Wheel, Torchbearer, Marvel Heroic RP/Cortex+ Heroic, Agon, In A Wicked Age . . . and none of them (at least in my experience) remotely fits these descriptions.

I think this is borne out by my actual play posts.

I'm not sure either. When you declare a story detail in Fate, it's not out of thin air or simply saying something to make it true. The player has to spend a fate point to invoke their character's relevant aspect. But also, the sort of situations where a player declares a story detail in Fate aren't typically the sort of situations where D&D (and its ilk) have "uncertainty" or "swinginess."

Example: You don't have the "Goblin" on your character sheet and/or can't cast "Comprehend Languages/Tongue"? Okay, then you can't communicate. No uncertainty. That's pretty different from how a similar situation may go down in Fate, as per the example of declaring a story detail in the Fate SRD.

This is exactly why any of our attempts to replace that d20 with 2d10 or 3d6 failed. When the outcome is 95% determined, rolling is not that fun anymore...

In the case of the AGE System, which utilizes a 3d6 resolution system, part of the uncertainty lies in whether stunt points and how many are produced as part of the roll. And you should check out Irownsworn (free) if you think that uncertainty can't be achieved using 2d10.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If all you care about is the raw mechanics then yes, does the lock get picked is all that matters. But some of us also care about the flavour or colour or whatever term you want to give it that in both imagination and narration overlays those mechanics.

In fact, that it's a coat of paint is the whole point: it takes the raw mechanics and turns them into something the imagination can get hold of.

Just because there's a pink one and a green one and a blue one and a yellow one doesn't mean that those little boxes on the hillside aren't made of ticky tacky or that they don't all look just the same. It is admittedly an improvement over every outside being painted beige and every internal wall being magnolia but it does nothing to e.g. change the internal layout or even plant anything in the garden.

And that you write "takes the raw mechanics and turns them into something the imagination can get hold of" is to me a fairly damning statement about how the raw mechanics get in the way of imagination in a lot of trad RPGs.

 

[Aldarc]

By the way, I think that designer Rob Donoghue has a better take on the relationship of swinginess and the d20 die resolution in this Twitter thread:


But the big take away is that most d20 rolls are pretty low stakes (e.g., "I swing a sword") but there are a lot of rolls so it balances out over the course over the session: i.e., low stakes but a high volumes of d20 rolls.

 

[Neonchameleon]

By the way, I think that designer Rob Donoghue has a better take on the relationship of swinginess and the d20 die resolution in this Twitter thread:

Thanks. That was good reading.

But the big take away is that most d20 rolls are pretty low stakes (e.g., "I swing a sword") but there are a lot of rolls so it balances out over the course over the session: i.e., low stakes but a high volumes of d20 rolls.

Very much this. But there are two things I'd add.

• The stakes under the rules as written can too often amount to "roll to see if you have to roll again" ("I failed the climb check. I want to roll again.") which is the opposite of uncertainty.
• Low stakes high volumes of rolls is sloooow. Slow is fine if you fill in a lot of detail (4e was the only D&D to really try with strong tactical combat and with skill challenges) but if not is just slow with minimal uncertainty. There's a reason we play Dungeons & Dragons not Penpushers & Paperwork

 

[Reynard]

There are a lot of ways to introduce uncertainty in D&D besides the core mechanic. There are random encounters. Reaction. Morale. Random treasure. The Deck of Many Things. Wild magic. Potion mixing madness. Critical hits and fumbles. Random dungeon dressing. Random NPC traits.

 

[Neonchameleon]

There are a lot of ways to introduce uncertainty in D&D besides the core mechanic. There are random encounters. Reaction. Morale. Random treasure. The Deck of Many Things. Wild magic. Potion mixing madness. Critical hits and fumbles. Random dungeon dressing. Random NPC traits.

You can put a lettuce leaf on a burger but it doesn't make it a vegetarian meal even if it has more vegetables than a bacon double cheeseburger. And most of what you list are either house rules or things that haven't been part of D&D for about half its life (or in one case is an artifact known for breaking campaigns).