Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you use the Success w/ Complication Module in the DMG or Fail Forward in the Basic PDF
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8279743" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>Thanks! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" alt="😁" title="Beaming face with smiling eyes :grin:" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f601.png" data-shortname=":grin:" /> I’m definitely up for delving more deeply into this point.</p><p></p><p>I mean... Yeah, I agree that’s the point of rolling dice. I just wouldn’t call that <em>adding</em> uncertainty if the outcome of the action is already uncertain. I’d just call it... I don’t know, good game mechanics? The narrative outcome is uncertain, so using a randomized method to resolve that uncertainty just makes sense - it creates ludonarrative harmony. On the other hand, if the outcome of the action is certain - it has no chance of success, or no chance of failure, or failure has no meaningful consequence - I think rolling the dice anyway would be adding uncertainty, which I don’t think would be desirable.</p><p></p><p>I think we may be using the same language in different ways here. When I say “meaningful consequence for failure,” I mean “meaningful consequence for rolling a total that doesn’t meet or exceed the DC.” That consequence may or may not be failure in the narrative sense; it could mean no progress towards your goal but still have to pay the cost for the attempt, or it could mean you do make progress but with some setback or complication. So, when you say “multiple meaningful outcomes,” I think you’re basically saying the same thing. The outcome that occurs when you fail the roll doesn’t necessarily need to be that the character fails to achieve their goal. It just needs to be a meaningful outcome separate from the meaningful outcome of succeeding the roll.</p><p></p><p>I want to reiterate though that in my experience “players like rolling ability checks” is really only true when failed ability checks frequently don’t have a significant cost or consequence, and/or when succeeding in your goals is only possible with a successful ability check. If success can be achieved without need of a check and checks always have meaningful costs or consequences, checks become an undesirable thing because they can fail and incur consequences, whereas automatic success can’t. The “object of the game,” so to speak, becomes coming up with the best possible approach to your goal, so that you can try to avoid having to make a dangerous check. That’s a dynamic I find far more appealing. It encourages players to think in terms of the fiction, and how to move within it to mitigate risk, rather than in terms of dice and modifiers and how to create opportunities to roll dice that their best modifiers can be applied to. And it makes every roll of the dice tense, because you know what’s at stake and you’re hoping to avoid incurring that negative outcome.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 8279743, member: 6779196"] Thanks! 😁 I’m definitely up for delving more deeply into this point. I mean... Yeah, I agree that’s the point of rolling dice. I just wouldn’t call that [I]adding[/I] uncertainty if the outcome of the action is already uncertain. I’d just call it... I don’t know, good game mechanics? The narrative outcome is uncertain, so using a randomized method to resolve that uncertainty just makes sense - it creates ludonarrative harmony. On the other hand, if the outcome of the action is certain - it has no chance of success, or no chance of failure, or failure has no meaningful consequence - I think rolling the dice anyway would be adding uncertainty, which I don’t think would be desirable. I think we may be using the same language in different ways here. When I say “meaningful consequence for failure,” I mean “meaningful consequence for rolling a total that doesn’t meet or exceed the DC.” That consequence may or may not be failure in the narrative sense; it could mean no progress towards your goal but still have to pay the cost for the attempt, or it could mean you do make progress but with some setback or complication. So, when you say “multiple meaningful outcomes,” I think you’re basically saying the same thing. The outcome that occurs when you fail the roll doesn’t necessarily need to be that the character fails to achieve their goal. It just needs to be a meaningful outcome separate from the meaningful outcome of succeeding the roll. I want to reiterate though that in my experience “players like rolling ability checks” is really only true when failed ability checks frequently don’t have a significant cost or consequence, and/or when succeeding in your goals is only possible with a successful ability check. If success can be achieved without need of a check and checks always have meaningful costs or consequences, checks become an undesirable thing because they can fail and incur consequences, whereas automatic success can’t. The “object of the game,” so to speak, becomes coming up with the best possible approach to your goal, so that you can try to avoid having to make a dangerous check. That’s a dynamic I find far more appealing. It encourages players to think in terms of the fiction, and how to move within it to mitigate risk, rather than in terms of dice and modifiers and how to create opportunities to roll dice that their best modifiers can be applied to. And it makes every roll of the dice tense, because you know what’s at stake and you’re hoping to avoid incurring that negative outcome. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you use the Success w/ Complication Module in the DMG or Fail Forward in the Basic PDF
Top