Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pedantic" data-source="post: 8935088" data-attributes="member: 6690965">This is often presented a major insight, that the only interesting dice rolls are the ones where a thing happens and the situation changes one way or the other, when I generally think that's a misunderstanding of what the dice were doing in the first place. Most systems with binary resolution are presenting dice rolls as a percentage chance to use a specific action. Again, I would draw your attention to the declared action as the bit that was interesting. Whether or not it &quot;matters&quot; whether the action succeeds or not is a function of the interaction of the declared action and the setting, not a function of resolution. I don't think it necessarily calls for &quot;adjust the environment to ensure the result is interesting&quot; so much as &quot;adjust resolution so it doesn't waste time.&quot; I'm very of take 10/20 mechanics for this reason, and would argue that it's a fault of rules presentations that present rolling dice as essential that they didn't get used more. They provide an entirely procedural answer to &quot;can you perform this action?&quot; that should be the default usage of such actions when time or other environmental concerns aren't a factor. Taking the insight, &quot;why were you rolling in an uninteresting environment?&quot; to the conclusion &quot;rolls should make the environment interesting&quot; I always found as kind of backwards formulation of the problem. The mechanical process of resolution (rolling dice repeatedly) was the problem, not the neutral output of the resolution system and the environment.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pedantic, post: 8935088, member: 6690965"] This is often presented a major insight, that the only interesting dice rolls are the ones where a thing happens and the situation changes one way or the other, when I generally think that's a misunderstanding of what the dice were doing in the first place. Most systems with binary resolution are presenting dice rolls as a percentage chance to use a specific action. Again, I would draw your attention to the declared action as the bit that was interesting. Whether or not it "matters" whether the action succeeds or not is a function of the interaction of the declared action and the setting, not a function of resolution. I don't think it necessarily calls for "adjust the environment to ensure the result is interesting" so much as "adjust resolution so it doesn't waste time." I'm very of take 10/20 mechanics for this reason, and would argue that it's a fault of rules presentations that present rolling dice as essential that they didn't get used more. They provide an entirely procedural answer to "can you perform this action?" that should be the default usage of such actions when time or other environmental concerns aren't a factor. Taking the insight, "why were you rolling in an uninteresting environment?" to the conclusion "rolls should make the environment interesting" I always found as kind of backwards formulation of the problem. The mechanical process of resolution (rolling dice repeatedly) was the problem, not the neutral output of the resolution system and the environment. [/QUOTE]

Verification