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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Mechanics that support what you want as a Player to feel like you matter
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="kenada" data-source="post: 9216355" data-attributes="member: 70468"><p>Reliable mechanics / conflict resolution. If the player states an intent and rolls success, they should achieve that success. The GM can contextualize it, but that context must not negate the success. This is how check resolution is handled in my homebrew system.</p><p></p><p>For example, in our last session¹, Dingo was interested in information on vampire hunters. He decided to see if his contact Kitty had information. She is a local fence and had worked him before, so she is considered a party friend. Mechanically, this was resolved by rolling Rapport + Wisdom (from his Underworld experience) to solicit her help. As part of the framing, I noted various possible consequences (such as the information coming with a cost, possibly being not very useful, etc). He rolled poorly but not <em>bad</em>, getting a 0-degree success.</p><p></p><p>A 0-degree success is a success, but it also comes with a consequence. That meant he could not get useless information because that would effectively turn the success into failure. Instead, it came with a request: she wants his help on a heist. Dingo could have resisted (to avoid the obligation), but he chose to accept it.</p><p></p><p>Another example, from a <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/commentary-thread-for-that-“describe-your-game-in-five-words”-thread.682741/post-9037989" target="_blank">past session</a>: the party wanted to ambush some raiders. They had time to prepare, which was resolved by rolling Camouflage + <approach> as a group check. They ended up with a 2-degree success, which is very good. It means no consequences and better than normal results. Since the intent was to ambush the raiders, the situation that followed had to be set up with the PCs in position. It would not have been an appropriate play for me to have the raiders come from a different direction, putting the PCs out of position.</p><p></p><p>(This form of resolution isn’t unique to my homebrew system, though I operationalize it may be. It’s inspired by games like Blades in the Dark and Apocalypse World.)</p><p></p><p>[HR][/HR]</p><p>1: Which I plan to post in the 5-words commentary thread this evening.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kenada, post: 9216355, member: 70468"] Reliable mechanics / conflict resolution. If the player states an intent and rolls success, they should achieve that success. The GM can contextualize it, but that context must not negate the success. This is how check resolution is handled in my homebrew system. For example, in our last session¹, Dingo was interested in information on vampire hunters. He decided to see if his contact Kitty had information. She is a local fence and had worked him before, so she is considered a party friend. Mechanically, this was resolved by rolling Rapport + Wisdom (from his Underworld experience) to solicit her help. As part of the framing, I noted various possible consequences (such as the information coming with a cost, possibly being not very useful, etc). He rolled poorly but not [I]bad[/I], getting a 0-degree success. A 0-degree success is a success, but it also comes with a consequence. That meant he could not get useless information because that would effectively turn the success into failure. Instead, it came with a request: she wants his help on a heist. Dingo could have resisted (to avoid the obligation), but he chose to accept it. Another example, from a [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/commentary-thread-for-that-“describe-your-game-in-five-words”-thread.682741/post-9037989']past session[/URL]: the party wanted to ambush some raiders. They had time to prepare, which was resolved by rolling Camouflage + <approach> as a group check. They ended up with a 2-degree success, which is very good. It means no consequences and better than normal results. Since the intent was to ambush the raiders, the situation that followed had to be set up with the PCs in position. It would not have been an appropriate play for me to have the raiders come from a different direction, putting the PCs out of position. (This form of resolution isn’t unique to my homebrew system, though I operationalize it may be. It’s inspired by games like Blades in the Dark and Apocalypse World.) [HR][/HR] 1: Which I plan to post in the 5-words commentary thread this evening. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Mechanics that support what you want as a Player to feel like you matter
Top