Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 9507823" data-attributes="member: 7031982">Good post.&nbsp; I think the OP was referring to dice mechanics, but you're right that &quot;randomness&quot; can have a much broader meaning.But since I do think the OP was asking about the use of dice, here's my take:In combat I stick to the rules.&nbsp; Let the dice fall where they may.Outside of combat, I prefer to let players solve challenges, and rely on dice as little as possible.&nbsp; I try to only use dice when the outcome of the action will have a meaningful impact on the game, and there's a clear cost to failure, and even then I try to lean on &quot;fail forward&quot;.&nbsp; To use the oft-cited example of lockpicking, unless there is a narrative reason why the player should not be able to pick the lock, I will assume they succeed.&nbsp; Eventually.&nbsp; But I might ask for a roll if there is some other kind of stakes involved.&nbsp; Failure might mean you don't succeed before the guard arrives, or you can't avoid leaving signs of your passage, or you can't relock it behind you, etc.&nbsp; In fact I might give the player a choice on a failure: &quot;You can choose between not opening the lock before the guard arrives, or succeeding but having to leave your pick stuck in the lock.&quot;But I try to only use RNG to determine the success or failure of explicit actions, and to not use dice passively, e.g. to determine if a character notices something they aren't already looking for (traps, secret doors) or if they know something.&nbsp; Take secret doors.&nbsp; Let's say there's a treasure room behind it, and normally a character would have a 40% chance of detecting it.&nbsp; I truly do not understand the logic of saying that, without any actions taken by the player, there's a 40% chance of getting the treasure, and a 60% chance of not getting it.&nbsp; If they fail the roll the door may as well not exist!&nbsp; Why is it even in the game?&nbsp; How is that fun for anybody?So I'm either going to blatantly telegraph the existence of the secret door, in which case the challenge is opening it, or I'm going to leave hints elsewhere to it's existence, in which case if they follow the hints and look in the right place, they automatically find it.&nbsp; (I might have the party all roll to see which one of them actually finds it, but at that point it's not a question of 'if' but 'who'.)When I ran Dragon Heist, I added a secret level below [spoiler]the Inn that the players acquired[/spoiler], and left hints in a couple different places.&nbsp; Eventually the players realized there had to be a secret door, and with some work figured it out, and the moment when they completed the last step and I said, &quot;Click!&quot; was probably...based on the reaction of the players...the highlight of the whole campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bill Zebub, post: 9507823, member: 7031982"] Good post. I think the OP was referring to dice mechanics, but you're right that "randomness" can have a much broader meaning. But since I do think the OP was asking about the use of dice, here's my take: In combat I stick to the rules. Let the dice fall where they may. Outside of combat, I prefer to let players solve challenges, and rely on dice as little as possible. I try to only use dice when the outcome of the action will have a meaningful impact on the game, and there's a clear cost to failure, and even then I try to lean on "fail forward". To use the oft-cited example of lockpicking, unless there is a narrative reason why the player should not be able to pick the lock, I will assume they succeed. Eventually. But I might ask for a roll if there is some other kind of stakes involved. Failure might mean you don't succeed before the guard arrives, or you can't avoid leaving signs of your passage, or you can't relock it behind you, etc. In fact I might give the player a choice on a failure: "You can choose between not opening the lock before the guard arrives, or succeeding but having to leave your pick stuck in the lock." But I try to only use RNG to determine the success or failure of explicit actions, and to not use dice passively, e.g. to determine if a character notices something they aren't already looking for (traps, secret doors) or if they know something. Take secret doors. Let's say there's a treasure room behind it, and normally a character would have a 40% chance of detecting it. I truly do not understand the logic of saying that, without any actions taken by the player, there's a 40% chance of getting the treasure, and a 60% chance of not getting it. If they fail the roll the door may as well not exist! Why is it even in the game? How is that fun for anybody? So I'm either going to blatantly telegraph the existence of the secret door, in which case the challenge is opening it, or I'm going to leave hints elsewhere to it's existence, in which case if they follow the hints and look in the right place, they automatically find it. (I [I]might[/I] have the party all roll to see which one of them actually finds it, but at that point it's not a question of 'if' but 'who'.) When I ran Dragon Heist, I added a secret level below [spoiler]the Inn that the players acquired[/spoiler], and left hints in a couple different places. Eventually the players realized there had to be a secret door, and with some work figured it out, and the moment when they completed the last step and I said, "Click!" was probably...based on the reaction of the players...the highlight of the whole campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification