D&D (2024) Inspiration From Nat 20 Will Bog Down The Game

[Blue]

In business there's a thing "you get what you measure for".

If you are running a helpdesk and your metric for how everyone does is call volume, your staff will get people on and off as quick as possible. More escalation to other groups, etc. If your metric is first call resolve, you'll get a lot of long calls where if they don't know they will keep the user on the line while they reach out, read documentation, and the like.

If you give out a reward for rolling 20s, players will tend to activity that rolls more dice. This is just human nature.

 

[Kai Lord]

If you give out a reward for rolling 20s, players will tend to activity that rolls more dice. This is just human nature.

I don't know. XP is often tied to killing things but I've never once played or GM'd a campaign where the party was hacking at every random townsperson or wayward traveler they came across because they'd be "rewarded." I think if you're in a group where suddenly everyone starts to try and make as many skill checks as possible for no other reason than to earn Inspiration off nat 20's then I would tend to think that that's a pretty lame group with far greater concerns for the DM than Inspiration mechanics.

 

[Blue]

I don't know. XP is often tied to killing things but I've never once played or GM'd a campaign where the party was hacking at every random townsperson or wayward traveler they came across because they'd be "rewarded."

This is the equivilent of "hanging up on every caller" to increase call volume. It has it's own set of anti-rewards. I assume that there was also some anti-reward to killing random townpeople?

I think we could make a fairly easy case that murderhobo as a style of play were encouraged by the "XP only for killing things" of a number of editions. Evidence that yes, some players will tend toward what they are getting rewarded for.

I think if you're in a group where suddenly everyone starts to try and make as many skill checks as possible for no other reason than to earn Inspiration off nat 20's then I would tend to think that that's a pretty lame group with far greater concerns for the DM than Inspiration mechanics.

It's human nature, found across multiple disciplines. If they didn't do it then bravo, you have a rare group of individuals or they aren't human. Either way, keepers.

 

[MarkB]

In business there's a thing "you get what you measure for".

If you are running a helpdesk and your metric for how everyone does is call volume, your staff will get people on and off as quick as possible. More escalation to other groups, etc. If your metric is first call resolve, you'll get a lot of long calls where if they don't know they will keep the user on the line while they reach out, read documentation, and the like.

If you give out a reward for rolling 20s, players will tend to activity that rolls more dice. This is just human nature.

And yet, the existing reward for people playing their character traits has not led to a noticeable uptick in people playing their character traits in many groups.

 

[Kai Lord]

This is the equivilent of "hanging up on every caller" to increase call volume. It has it's own set of anti-rewards. I assume that there was also some anti-reward to killing random townpeople?

And a DM can just as easily implement anti-rewards for abusing skill checks. If you hang up on every caller in a real life call center then you aren't going to be rewarded with a raise despite technically having a call time far below the desired metric. So with that in mind if a player says that they're going to attempt 20 different skills for the sole purpose of statistically guaranteeing a natural 20 then the DM can just say that the "specialness" of a nat 20 is wholly negated and therefore provides no inspiration.

That will force players to use the system, but not abuse it. Like the call center employee who needs to find that sweet spot of quickly resolving a caller's complaint and getting them off the phone without coming across as rude or unthorough and making the caller think that they were rushed off the phone, D&D players can try to come up with narratively valid reasons for attempting new skill checks that might very well enhance play for everyone.

The old "Keep your distance Chewie but don't look like you're keeping your distance..."

Because at the end of the day trying to accomplish cool things should be a good thing for characters and rewarding natural 20's can give some players who'd normally be content chilling in the back while the same party member always tries to open the door, disarm the trap, take point, persuade the guard, etc., might even be inspired (heh heh) to take it upon themselves to step up and attempt to do some of those things themselves.

 

[Blue]

And a DM can just as easily implement anti-rewards for abusing skill checks.

Are you proposing that this will be in the basic rules, or a house rule that some will adopt? If it's in the books it's one thing. If it's broken such that there needs to be a commonly adopted house rule to fix it that's another case.

 

[Blue]

And yet, the existing reward for people playing their character traits has not led to a noticeable uptick in people playing their character traits in many groups.

You mean the most ignored core rule? The one that puts memorizing about 25 traits on the DM to remember to give out on top of everything else, and remember for the player to actually use. Before it expires in ten game minutes. There's been multiple threads here where most people ignore it, and if they don't they house rule it.

Again, I referenced murderhobos - are you saying that the editions of only XP for killing things has net been a big factor in that style of play?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't know. XP is often tied to killing things but I've never once played or GM'd a campaign where the party was hacking at every random townsperson or wayward traveler they came across because they'd be "rewarded." I think if you're in a group where suddenly everyone starts to try and make as many skill checks as possible for no other reason than to earn Inspiration off nat 20's then I would tend to think that that's a pretty lame group with far greater concerns for the DM than Inspiration mechanics.

With the current fad of milestone leveling, PCs are encouraged just to get through the adventure to the point where the DM says they can level. Is that better?

 

[MarkB]

You mean the most ignored core rule? The one that puts memorizing about 25 traits on the DM to remember to give out on top of everything else, and remember for the player to actually use. Before it expires in ten game minutes. There's been multiple threads here where most people ignore it, and if they don't they house rule it.

Yes, that was my point.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And a DM can just as easily implement anti-rewards for abusing skill checks. If you hang up on every caller in a real life call center then you aren't going to be rewarded with a raise despite technically having a call time far below the desired metric. So with that in mind if a player says that they're going to attempt 20 different skills for the sole purpose of statistically guaranteeing a natural 20 then the DM can just say that the "specialness" of a nat 20 is wholly negated and therefore provides no inspiration.

That will force players to use the system, but not abuse it. Like the call center employee who needs to find that sweet spot of quickly resolving a caller's complaint and getting them off the phone without coming across as rude or unthorough and making the caller think that they were rushed off the phone, D&D players can try to come up with narratively valid reasons for attempting new skill checks that might very well enhance play for everyone.

The old "Keep your distance Chewie but don't look like you're keeping your distance..."

Because at the end of the day trying to accomplish cool things should be a good thing for characters and rewarding natural 20's can give some players who'd normally be content chilling in the back while the same party member always tries to open the door, disarm the trap, take point, persuade the guard, etc., might even be inspired (heh heh) to take it upon themselves to step up and attempt to do some of those things themselves.

I think that, rather than encouraging using the system, it would encourage resenting the system.