Let's Talk About Core Game Mechanics

[Thomas Shey]

I think the notion that the dice represent unspecified elements of the fiction - which I've heard a bit, certainly not just from @Thomas Shey - pushes strongly towards a "task resolution" approach to action resolution. For the reasons I gave upthread, it is a confusing issue even within super-simulationist RPGs like RQ and RM. (And that is based on experience, not just analysis.)

I don't think so. I think it can apply just as much to systems not focused on task resolution; it just applies to a much broader amount of elements. I see no reason it can't apply to conflict resolution, for example.

 

[pemerton]

I don't think so. I think it can apply just as much to systems not focused on task resolution; it just applies to a much broader amount of elements. I see no reason it can't apply to conflict resolution, for example.

Here's an instance of play, from Torchbearer 2e:

Fea-bella decided to purchase some holy water for battling the undead. I've been following the gear availability rules from the LMM pretty closely, which has limited what the PCs can buy in the Wizard's Tower without going to the black market (which in this context I'm construing as buying directly from townsfolk or peasants). Holy water is listed as availability 3, ie in Wizards' Towers, Religious Bastions and Forgotten Temple Complexes. I toyed with being a mean GM and saying that, for holy water, one of those is not like the other two. But then I reviewed my list of town facilities for a Wizard's Tower and allowed that there was a shrine, where holy water might be acquired. Golin offered help. But the Resources test (5 dice against Ob 3) failed - the shrine attendant sold Fea-bella the holy water, but only after berating her for her lack of regular attendance or offerings (ie her and Golin both had their Resources taxed down to 1).

Fea-bella also bought some wine, food and candles.

Golin used his 2nd level Outcast ability to haggle for free. The test failed, but the Failed Haggling Events roll didn't hurt him. He also bought some candles and food, but had some trouble with other purchases. He failed an attempt to buy rope, and I introduced a twist - a constable of the Tower, who wanted to learn more about Golin's involvement in an explosion at the hedge wizard's establishment, and its subsequent burning down. Golin decided to turn the gathered crowd against the constable and in his favour - opposed Oratory tests! Fea-bella helped with her Manipulator ("He's an innocent Dwarf, just trying to buy some rope!" called a heckler from the crowd), and Golin succeeded. So the constable backed off, but not without giving a look to the rope vendor that made it clear no rope was to be vended (ie the failed Resources test was to stand).

Golin then decided to buy a small shovel (pack 1 compared to the standard pack 2) - I asked whether he wanted wooden (Ob 1) or metal (Ob 2) and his player replied "Wooden, of course!" - it can also be used as fuel if necessary. But the three dice (Resources back up to 2 by this stage, plus +1D from a stimulated economy) yielded not a single success, and who should Golin see coming towards him once again but the constable! I told him to note down his new enemy, and that the town phase was now done. Both players succeeded on their Lifestyle checks, and so returned Fresh to Megloss's house to begin the adventure proper.

So there are three failures here:

* The failed test to purchase the holy water;

* The failed test to buy the rope;

* The failed test to buy the shovel.​

On the first failure, I (as GM) opt for success (ie the holy water is acquired) with a condition (ie taxing of Resources). In the fiction, the shrine attendant asks for more than they might have (which runs down the PCs' cash) and berates them (which runs down the PCs' credit). The taxing of Resources correlates to this.

On the second failure, I (as GM) opt for a twist - ie instead of being able to buy the rope, the PC is confronted with another obstacle (the constable).

On the third failure, I (as GM) again opt for a twist, and this time I push things harder: the town phase is over, and the mechanical consequences of that (Lifestyle test) are worked out.

This is the sort of thing I have in mind. The player's failed roll prompts the need for a decision on my part, as GM - to allow success, but with a condition imposed; or to introduce a twist. But I think it's obvious that the dice don't represent the shrine attendant's attitude towards the PC (or the PC's failure to have attended and made offerings at the shrine); nor the constable and the constable's attitude towards the PC.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Here's an instance of play, from Torchbearer 2e:

I don't see how any of that is supposed to change my point here.

 

[Nth Dimension Games]

One one hand, rolling dice represents the probability of creating an entirely new universe based on the outcome of a check and on the other hand, nothing.

My preference is going to come down to the game. Reading through this thread, dice represent a lot of different things. Some I read and know I'm not going to like that type of game so the esoteric way they use their dice is none of my concern. For games that seem interesting, I'm more interested in what the dice represent.

For my system, the randomness of the dice represents all the tiny little things it doesn't account for. We can have modifiers for moving across slightly wet bumpy terrain with the occasional mud pit and have lists upon lists of every possible situation we can come across, or we can roll it into a dice roll. If you fail, because of the dice, then it was because of -insert narratively relevant/interesting reason here-

But its not even that shallow because the die rolls are also tied to the skill of the person/creature using it. The higher their skill, the higher value of dice they roll. What's happening is the totality of the random things we don't account for or control represents about 20 points of any sort of task that can result in failure. Contested comparisons, Searching for a Hidden enemy, both carry the same 20 point variation. If the searching character has a higher skill, they are able to cut into that 20 points deeper than the lower skilled hidden enemy. They may not do it every time, but the probability that they account for one of those unnamed/unknown variables is higher. This is not necessarily a hidden mechanic because of how the dice tell the story it's how I've justified what the precisely impact the dice have on the task at hand and how I justify why dice scale with skill.

I'm going to get into maths a bit so if that's not your thing, thanks for reading this far.

Dice are scaled off a character's Rank for that task. Ranks 1-3 allow for a d4, 4-6 a d6, 7-9 a d8, 10-12 d10, 13-15 d12, and 16+ the d20. What this allows me to do, is to keep the random component of the dice about 30% of the influence of any action that can result in failure. My issue with games like D&D is how the d20 is so overwhelmingly important in the early levels, becomes balanced in the mid game, and irrelevant at the end game. I think this is why we see so many different 2d6, 1d12, etc systems emerge, to keep the randomization under control.

So back to the OP's question. What's a good core mechanic?

I think rolling dice is a perfectly fine core mechanic but I don't want systems which require you to always use it. There should be a way to guarantee an outcome. My justification for why dice are rolled, accounting for the unknown, will allow what they do know (their skill rank, miscellaneous modifiers, attribute modifiers) to be enough regardless of what they don't know, ya know?

The d20 in D&D requirement for almost everything and the automatic 5% to fail at anything has contributed to its current silly state. I hate this core mechanic but a lot of people love it.