Are you playing D&D if there are no dice?

[The Levitator]

(O_O) Can anything I type really be seen as a "reprimand" when I have a smiley for my sig? (^_^)

Sorry. I was just feeling a bit ornery--tho' still good-naturedly so--& forgot one of my own rules of online discussion for a moment.

Curse these emoticons and their inability to more accurately depict human emotion!

Bah....it's all good. I was just trying to be a little silly myself. One of the things I really like about this forum as opposed to some others is that for the most part, people don't go into cardiac arrest about every single post. Thanks for the clarification though! Although, had I done a better job with my post, it wouldn't have come off so seriously in the first place.

 

[William drake]

Its D&D, its just the better form. Dice, make the game interactive...without it, your might as well play a video game which has all the random % built into it.

 

[The Levitator]

No disrespect, but in our game, human conversation makes the game interactive, not little pieces of plastic. It seems to me that a lot of people have very strong opinions about a game style they haven't even tried. I have 2 groups, one with 4 players and one with 5, and they prefer our style of gaming to other groups they play in. I've recently been asked by a local gaming store to demonstrate our gamestyle at an upcoming gaming night (partly because of the diceless combat, and partly because of all of the digital aids we use to game). I'm sorry, but if little pieces of plastic are what makes you feel "part of the game", then it makes me wonder about what's going on with the rest of the game. The actual human interaction, to me, is where the focus should be. How in the heck does playing diceless equate to videogames? Our games are much more conversational and the players rely much more on description than mechanics, which to me feels much more like a roleplaying game.

I understand that to some, dice are a sacred cow to roleplaying, but it would be nice if people were a little more open-minded and weren't so quick to judge something they haven't even tried. Heck, I even brought up the idea of starting to use dice for non-combat situations like skill checks, and everyone voted it down. They prefer the storytelling game style we have over using numbers to describe the action. We're playing by the rules, and using the D&D system to determine the success or failure of actions. The ONLY difference is that we use a random number generator instead of dice. If that's enough to knock the world off its axis for some, that's too bad, because some of those people just might like the game style if they actually tried it. I haven't had a player yet who didn't want to join our game because we didn't chuck dice around. Everyone is a little hesitant, even I was when we first tried it. I've been playing D&D since 1981, so it's not like I'm new to the game and am just arbitrarily changing things. It was kind of hard to let go of the dice at first. But after experiencing smoother and faster game sessions that felt much more immersive, we've never looked back.

I'm even working with a few DM's online using DM Genie and Maptools to show them how we game, so to insinuate that we are on some kind of island is a bit off base too. Opinions are great to have, but have a lot more credibility with experience. I don't mean to come off defensive, but frankly I'm getting a little tired of constantly being told what's "the best" way to play by people who've only played one way their whole life. I wouldn't take marriage advice from a priest, or child rearing advice from someone who doesn't have kids.

ok, rant over, let the bashing continue!

 

[DonTadow]

No disrespect, but in our game, human conversation makes the game interactive, not little pieces of plastic.

I think by interactive most people, despite the crudeness in some cases, are saying that dice make the game portion interactive, whereas conversation makes the story portion interactive. Which can lead to the question of is the story the game or are they seperate but equal entities of a role playing game.

I think a game has to be competitive. In d and d, its the pcs competing against the environment or the world, not necessarily the DM. They make decisions and the outcomes of their decisions is based on rolling dice. The fact that the player has no say so in the outcome of his decision is a big point in this discussion.

 

[The Levitator]

The fact that the player has no say so in the outcome of his decision is a big point in this discussion.

I get that. What I don't get is the illusion that some people experience in that throwing a piece of plastic is giving anyone any more say in the outcome than clicking a button on a random number generator. I know people that literally think that throwing dice somehow gives them "control" of the game. I have friends who have strange superstitious rituals with their dice. And ya know what? They are great gamers and have a ball with their style of gaming. While I don't really understand the logic of feeling like rolling dice somehow gives you any control of the outcome, I don't bash my friends for their dice quirks. I understand what you are saying DonTadow, mostly because you explain yourself well without belittling those of differing opinions. I totally understand how it can feel more like a game when you use physical dice because dice are a game mechanic in many different games. Heck, Chutes and Ladders uses dice, so we've been raised to connect "dice" to "gaming". I'm not discounting that, because it's a very valid point. What I am debating, is that dice are absolutely necessary for a roleplaying game to feel like a game. It's especially frustrating when people who have never played diceless find themselves qualified to tell those who play diceless what is and isn't "gaming".

I do enjoy your perspective DonTadow, so I hope you take any of this as directed at you. Actually, it's not directed at anyone in particular, it's more a generalization aimed at other generalizations. So really, I'm just venting and in the end, it's just a game to me. Even though I don't use dice. I would just enjoy these types of conversations more with people who actually have some experience in the thing they have such strong opinions about. I think you've mentioned in other threads about experimenting with it and not finding it to your liking. If nothing else, I do know that you have never bashed us for our playing style or told us it's "wrong". So it's nice to occasionally have a discussion with someone who can have a different opinion and still appreciate mine.

I do look forward to your posts DonTadow, and hope to see you a little more often on the DM Genie boards. They've slowed a bit since Janik has been so busy, but us diehards are keeping it breathing!

 

[Fishbone]

Pre-rolling saves so much time. Also, it adds a little mystery into the game. People constantly complain about "metagaming" and players using knowledge their PC wouldn't but don't even blink an eye as they are calculating the precise amount of damage Goulgard the Berserker does to the Chuul with his greatsword. Its a little goofy to me.
Same thing with taking damage. Its not like in real life someone would go "Ah ha! You only grazed me with that butterfly knife! I only take 2 damage!" The DM should get a duplicated sheet for all of the players and mark the damage down accordingly.

 

[DonTadow]

I get that. What I don't get is the illusion that some people experience in that throwing a piece of plastic is giving anyone any more say in the outcome than clicking a button on a random number generator. I know people that literally think that throwing dice somehow gives them "control" of the game. I have friends who have strange superstitious rituals with their dice. And ya know what? They are great gamers and have a ball with their style of gaming. While I don't really understand the logic of feeling like rolling dice somehow gives you any control of the outcome, I don't bash my friends for their dice quirks. I understand what you are saying DonTadow, mostly because you explain yourself well without belittling those of differing opinions. I totally understand how it can feel more like a game when you use physical dice because dice are a game mechanic in many different games. Heck, Chutes and Ladders uses dice, so we've been raised to connect "dice" to "gaming". I'm not discounting that, because it's a very valid point. What I am debating, is that dice are absolutely necessary for a roleplaying game to feel like a game. It's especially frustrating when people who have never played diceless find themselves qualified to tell those who play diceless what is and isn't "gaming".

I do enjoy your perspective DonTadow, so I hope you take any of this as directed at you. Actually, it's not directed at anyone in particular, it's more a generalization aimed at other generalizations. So really, I'm just venting and in the end, it's just a game to me. Even though I don't use dice. I would just enjoy these types of conversations more with people who actually have some experience in the thing they have such strong opinions about. I think you've mentioned in other threads about experimenting with it and not finding it to your liking. If nothing else, I do know that you have never bashed us for our playing style or told us it's "wrong". So it's nice to occasionally have a discussion with someone who can have a different opinion and still appreciate mine.

I do look forward to your posts DonTadow, and hope to see you a little more often on the DM Genie boards. They've slowed a bit since Janik has been so busy, but us diehards are keeping it breathing!

All I can think of is for the same reason my gf yells at me for touching her dice and why one of my players declares his urine dice (its a bad yellow color) off limits for anyone to touch. It's all a mental thing.
You are absolutely right, mathematically it makes no difference. Ironically, a computer generated list of rolls is probably the only true way to get an accurate probability roll as most dice usually have some form of a roughness to them after a few rolls. Not to mention a number of dice are designed flawed with the many different materials and imprints. The more sides toa dice the more likely there is that there is an unbalance. And d and d hinges around the d20. How ironic that the only real way to get true randomness would be for a way that doesn't involve often flawed dice.

But, and i don't want to go to far into philosophy, a great number believe that we can alter luck or we can somehow use luck to maneuver probability. Your group has pretty much came to the realization that there is no luck and that one mans rolls are no different than another. Which my logical mind tells me is true (thus i like the idea of your gaming style). But my gaming mind is telling me, I need my luck to determine my roll give me those bones.

From an overview perspective, it seems silly. A great number of people are belittling Levitators style because he refuses to believe in a mystical aura around a person that determines our fate. It is almost akin to belittling someone because they don't believe in the little green imps whom still the socks.

Oddly enough, whereas the gaming interactivity may be vastly different, I am betting such a game would have an increase in the story activity. Instead of switching a good rpg session to game mechanics all the time. IE ( I want to look at that clock, i roll a 14). It goes more like
I want to look at that clock, what do i see, and the dm clicks a button gets a roll of 18 and describes what the pc sees. The PC has no idea what was rolled and thus can not metagame. There is no other multiple rolls by the other players because they figure they can roll higher. I can even imagine that other players will probably be more attentive in game as they have eliminated an invisible barrier between the player and the dm. Instead of falling into the attack, ac rutt. Every combat is a series of I thrust my blade, i slash into the cretan etc instead of ..i roll a 29, 29 doesnt hit the ac.

On a smaller scale, I've had this argument with a couple of players when i first started rolling spots, listens, hides etc. for the character. Their major argument was that the DM's luck was always cursed.

So I started a little test. I rolled all the initiatives one game, and then had them roll it the next. With 3 battles each session the conclusion was that both random roll sets came out random. We kept the random initiative and put into our house rules that the dm has the right to make any secret roll for the sake of rpgin.

 

[The Levitator]

Oddly enough, whereas the gaming interactivity may be vastly different, I am betting such a game would have an increase in the story activity. Instead of switching a good rpg session to game mechanics all the time. IE ( I want to look at that clock, i roll a 14). It goes more like
I want to look at that clock, what do i see, and the dm clicks a button gets a roll of 18 and describes what the pc sees. The PC has no idea what was rolled and thus can not metagame. There is no other multiple rolls by the other players because they figure they can roll higher. I can even imagine that other players will probably be more attentive in game as they have eliminated an invisible barrier between the player and the dm. Instead of falling into the attack, ac rutt. Every combat is a series of I thrust my blade, i slash into the cretan etc instead of ..i roll a 29, 29 doesn't hit the ac.

That actually turned out to be the best side effect of gaming diceless. We initially tried it to speed up combat, and it definitely does that! But the best part about it is that the game truly becomes a roleplaying game, where people are using descriptions and those descriptions are the basis for decision, not numbers.

To be fair though, we use a relative health system in our game. We primarily use Maptools as a virtual tabletop, and it has the ability to assign different colored halos to each character token. Our system is this:

Green = healthy (76-100% of total HP)
Yellow = Light Battle Fatigue (51-75% of total HP) LBF is -1 STR, -1 DEX
Orange = Moderate Battle Fatigue (26-50% of total HP) MBF is -2 STR, -2 DEX
Reed = Heavy Battle Fatigue (1-25% of total HP) HBF is -4 STR, -4 DEX

The reason I use the term "battle fatigue" is that I created a system to reflect the wear and tear and physical drain of combat. My players don't like the way that a 100HP fighter fights just as well at 1HP. So, I created this system to emulate the physical effects of swinging swords and taking nicks and smacks to the ribs in combat. I put the modifiers at the end of each example of the relative health system.

We also use the Opposed Defense Roll variant from the DMG, the Clobbered variant from the DMG, and the Facing variant from UA. We added these things so that I can give a more vivid description of a gritty and dangerous combat. That's what my players wanted, and I did my best to give it to them.

Take the Opposed Roll Variant. There's no more foregone conclusion of the high level guy always hitting and the low level guy always missing. Statistically, the high level guy is still going to come out the same, but at least the lower level guy has a chance for luck to step in and turn the combat around for him. The other nice thing about the Opposed Roll variant is that a poor swing can still hit (both roll low) and a great swing can still miss (both roll high). That gives me a lot more options to describe combat in greater detail.

The Clobbered variant basically says that if you take at least 50% of your current HP, you can only take a standard action the next round. What a great addition for a DM in a descriptive sense, but it also makes combat MUCH more tactical. Going from 60HP to 30HP isn't time to panic, but when that same fighter is down to 8HP it will only take 4HP to clobber him.

The Facing variant not only helps me with descriptions, but it gives a lot more tactical options to the players. We have an engagement rule in place because it seemed that with the UA rules as written, players could essentially "leapfrog" each other to get into flanking positions. With the Engagement rule, you may engage 1 combatant. That means that your facing will change to match that combatant if he tries to circle or change your position. My players have really learned to use that by engaging with an enemy, and circling to give their allies flank and rear attacks.

As you can see, we've added several variants to actually ADD "gameability" to our game. We may play diceless, but I believe our game style is even more "gamelike" than Core, because my players have more options in combat, and their decisions are based on visualization, not numbers.

I have no problem with people that have superstitious beliefs about dice. But those people really shouldn't make judgements about something they've never even tried. I guarantee that our gameplay style feels every bit as "gamelike" as rolling dice. I'd even be willing to demo it via online if anyone were willing to give it an honest shot. All you need is Maptools, which is free and found here Maptools and either Skype or GTalk. If anyone wants to experiment with it, IM me first, as we are using the development version of Maptools and there are several to choose from. I'll be more than happy to help people learn how to use Maptools.

I'm not going to try and convert anyone, because I know that our style of gaming isn't the "be all end all" of gaming to everyone. And neither is anyone else's style. But I would at least try their way of gaming first before weighing in on it.

I'm already working with 3 other DM's on playing our system, so it may take me a day or so to get back to anyone who wants to give it a go online. Like my mommy used to say, "don't knock it 'till ya try it"

 

[Darklone]

We used a darts board once instead of a d20 (throwing blind). Worked fine... but we drank even more beer than usual.

 

[jmucchiello]

I think by interactive most people, despite the crudeness in some cases, are saying that dice make the game portion interactive, whereas conversation makes the story portion interactive. Which can lead to the question of is the story the game or are they seperate but equal entities of a role playing game.

I suspect that most players/DMs never consciously think about the game portion versus story portion of the role-playing. That we are discussing it at all shows we are taking all of this too seriously.