Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 6999987">I wrote a wall of text describing a problem I see in many/most RPGs, with an analysis of some of the typical options for addressing it and why they are insufficient, but then decided to skip most of the rationalization and just propose my solution.&nbsp; If y'all find it interesting enough to debate then we can expand on it.Goal:Avoid certainty in situations where characters would only have strong hunches, not absolute knowledge, in order to make subsequent decision-making more meaningful.&nbsp; For example, when trying to determine if a prisoner is lying, mechanically represent the fact that even strong indications of honesty/dishonesty might have other explanations.&nbsp; In other words, The player sees the die roll on the table, but the character is still guessing.&nbsp; The goal is to model that.Proposal:When using a skill to determine if a character knows something, but that &quot;knowing&quot; it would realistically mean believing, on a success the DM makes an additional secret roll.&nbsp; If this roll produces a 1, the DM gives the player the wrong answer.&nbsp; The die used starts at d4 and goes up 1 step for each 5 points above the DC that was rolled.&nbsp; If the original roll was a natural 20, the DM rolls 2 dice (of the appropriate type) and only lies if both come up 1.Variant 1: Just use one type of die for simplicity.Variant 2: On a natural 20 no secret die is rolled; evidence is found which leads to complete certainty.&nbsp; (E.g., the captive says something that the character knows cannot be true.)&nbsp; Example:The player says he wants to climb a tree.&nbsp; The DM tells him to roll Strength(Athletics) and the player succeeds.&nbsp; The DM says, &quot;Ok, you climb the tree.&quot;(Ha, tricked you.&nbsp; That example was to illustrate that this system isn't applicable to the vast majority of skill rolls.)Example 2:The player wants to know if he thinks the guard is lying.&nbsp; The DM tells him to roll Wisdom(Insight) and the player gets a natural 20, for a total of 27.&nbsp; The DM looks at the result for a moment, then picks up two dice and rolls them behind the screen.&nbsp; &quot;You think he's telling the truth,&quot; he says.So the player knows he made a great roll, and that whatever the DC was he most likely rocked it.&nbsp; It's gotta be at least a d6 the DM used, if not a d8 or even a d10.&nbsp; At worst there's like a 1/36 chance that he read the situation wrong.But, still, there's a chance....More Example questions:&quot;Can I tell if the chest is trapped?&quot;
&quot;Should I take the passage up, the passage down, or the passage straight ahead?&quot;
&quot;Can I tell if the mushrooms are poisonous?&quot;
&quot;Do I know the proper greeting in that cult?&quot;
&quot;Do I cut the blue wire or the red wire?&quot;That was still kind of a Wall of Text, huh?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 6999987"] I wrote a wall of text describing a problem I see in many/most RPGs, with an analysis of some of the typical options for addressing it and why they are insufficient, but then decided to skip most of the rationalization and just propose my solution. If y'all find it interesting enough to debate then we can expand on it. [B]Goal:[/B] Avoid certainty in situations where characters would only have strong hunches, not absolute knowledge, in order to make subsequent decision-making more meaningful. For example, when trying to determine if a prisoner is lying, mechanically represent the fact that even strong indications of honesty/dishonesty might have other explanations. In other words, The [I]player[/I] sees the die roll on the table, but the [I]character[/I] is still guessing. The goal is to model that. [B]Proposal:[/B] When using a skill to determine if a character knows something, but that "knowing" it would realistically mean [I]believing[/I], on a success the DM makes an additional secret roll. If this roll produces a 1, the DM gives the player the wrong answer. The die used starts at d4 and goes up 1 step for each 5 points above the DC that was rolled. If the original roll was a natural 20, the DM rolls 2 dice (of the appropriate type) and only lies if both come up 1. Variant 1: Just use one type of die for simplicity. Variant 2: On a natural 20 no secret die is rolled; evidence is found which leads to complete certainty. (E.g., the captive says something that the character knows cannot be true.) [B]Example:[/B] The player says he wants to climb a tree. The DM tells him to roll Strength(Athletics) and the player succeeds. The DM says, "Ok, you climb the tree." (Ha, tricked you. That example was to illustrate that this system isn't applicable to the vast majority of skill rolls.) [B]Example 2:[/B] The player wants to know if he thinks the guard is lying. The DM tells him to roll Wisdom(Insight) and the player gets a natural 20, for a total of 27. The DM looks at the result for a moment, then picks up two dice and rolls them behind the screen. "You think he's telling the truth," he says. So the player knows he made a great roll, and that whatever the DC was he most likely rocked it. It's gotta be at least a d6 the DM used, if not a d8 or even a d10. At worst there's like a 1/36 chance that he read the situation wrong. But, still, there's a [I]chance[/I].... More Example questions:[INDENT]"Can I tell if the chest is trapped?" "Should I take the passage up, the passage down, or the passage straight ahead?" "Can I tell if the mushrooms are poisonous?" "Do I know the proper greeting in that cult?" "Do I cut the blue wire or the red wire?"[/INDENT] That was still kind of a Wall of Text, huh? [/QUOTE]

Verification