Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8280914" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>Wait why would you narrate failure for something that it is <em>possible</em> they might never figure out? </p><p></p><p>I guess I just don’t have any instinctive or philosophical impulse to tie the die roll that strongly to a singular action. To me, it’s “I try to do XYZ” and then “okay roll this skill(s) for it”, and the roll or rolls represents the overall attempt to do the thing. </p><p> </p><p>If I think that it’s something where enough time will lead inevitably to success, then the roll is just there to determine how long it takes. </p><p></p><p>For me, playing that way slows things down, and is less interesting and engaging than requiring a change in circumstance or approach. I might allow one “I go do something else, eat a snack, clear my head, and try again, but if that doesn’t work, it doesn’t feel right to me to just keep rolling until it works. It doesn’t match my experience of life, nor what we want from telling stories together. </p><p></p><p>I find that for my group, rolling investigation, thieves tools, and sleight of hand, makes the resolution more interesting that a single binary roll. </p><p> </p><p>It also reduces the “only the person with the best modifier to X skill should attempt the task” dynamic by opening up more mechanical approaches. </p><p> </p><p>Picking a lock is going to involve thieves tools, but the artificer, rogue, or the monk with thieves tools from background, all have a good chance of getting past the lock, using different combinations of proficiencies. </p><p> </p><p>That, and since I want a success ladder of sorts, and the d20 is very swingy, it’s a good way to get more of a curve of results. </p><p> </p><p>Oddly, part of my motivation is the same as yours. I don’t want extraneous rolls. The situation determines whether non-binary results will be more interesting, which determines whether it’s a single check or a set of them, but I strongly prefer to just have one resolution of the task. If it’s a thing where the character would just keep trying, then it’s possible the roll determines time rather than success/failure, but either way I just want to do the resolution once. </p><p></p><p>Yeah fair</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8280914, member: 6704184"] Wait why would you narrate failure for something that it is [I]possible[/I] they might never figure out? I guess I just don’t have any instinctive or philosophical impulse to tie the die roll that strongly to a singular action. To me, it’s “I try to do XYZ” and then “okay roll this skill(s) for it”, and the roll or rolls represents the overall attempt to do the thing. If I think that it’s something where enough time will lead inevitably to success, then the roll is just there to determine how long it takes. For me, playing that way slows things down, and is less interesting and engaging than requiring a change in circumstance or approach. I might allow one “I go do something else, eat a snack, clear my head, and try again, but if that doesn’t work, it doesn’t feel right to me to just keep rolling until it works. It doesn’t match my experience of life, nor what we want from telling stories together. I find that for my group, rolling investigation, thieves tools, and sleight of hand, makes the resolution more interesting that a single binary roll. It also reduces the “only the person with the best modifier to X skill should attempt the task” dynamic by opening up more mechanical approaches. Picking a lock is going to involve thieves tools, but the artificer, rogue, or the monk with thieves tools from background, all have a good chance of getting past the lock, using different combinations of proficiencies. That, and since I want a success ladder of sorts, and the d20 is very swingy, it’s a good way to get more of a curve of results. Oddly, part of my motivation is the same as yours. I don’t want extraneous rolls. The situation determines whether non-binary results will be more interesting, which determines whether it’s a single check or a set of them, but I strongly prefer to just have one resolution of the task. If it’s a thing where the character would just keep trying, then it’s possible the roll determines time rather than success/failure, but either way I just want to do the resolution once. Yeah fair [/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