Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bawylie" data-source="post: 7000265" data-attributes="member: 6776133">I think that sometimes we DMs look for a system to use before other solutions. Maybe it's the way we're trained by the books. You really could introduce uncertainty by giving the WRONG info once for every four or six successful checks. Of course, I would tell the players the uncertainty rule is in play at the start. But, randomness and chaos are already antagonists. And we want to empower the players to make good, informed decisions that neuter chaos and randomness altogether. (I do, anyway). So I'm unlikely to screw with success. So you might, from time to time, give them correct and true information on a failed roll, as if it were a success. An unbelievable truth. A few of these will create uncertainty over time. And it won't screw with successes. I probably wouldn't do this either.  The information I give out as a DM serves to answer a question, conclude the current scene, and lead into the next scene. If it doesn't do that, action and play time stall badly. I don't like when playtime is eaten up by deliberation. So when does uncertainty serve me best? What do I want it for? Largely, I want uncertainty to augment the tension when players must decide between This and That. Choosing between equally good, equally bad, a good option with a bad rider, or sacrificing a good option to prevent a bad option - that stuff is where tension lives and where I like my uncertainty. Take the Dark Knight. Joker has kidnapped 2 people and tells batman where they both are. But that he can only save one of them. Batman's interrogation of Joker gets him the info he needs to go to the next scene. There are kidnapped people in peril at different locations. The dilemma and tension for batman is which of the two victims he'll try to save. (In a twist, Joker lied about which victim was at which location).  And that's a sort of clever way to introduce the unbelievable truth and some uncertainty. The kidnap game's rules and players and locations were completely true. But in future dealings with Joker, batman must factor in some small uncertainty that can carry huge consequences. So IF I'm going to add uncertainty, I'm not going to do it in the structure of getting players to make decisions or move from turn to turn and scene to scene. I'm going to introduce it more broadly and consequentially.  So I guess, I want the players to be able to rely on their abilities and investments and improvements. So I won't hinder those (generally). And I want tension to exist in action and decision (as opposed to unreliability). I also need the players to trust me, even when they don't trust an NPC. Lots to unpack here. Hmm-Brad</blockquote>

Verification