NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9290843" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Not at all.The points of using dice (or any other randomness) are quite obvious:1. To create tension; until dice are rolled, players don't know for sure what will actually happen. Note "for sure."2. To prevent stale gameplay due to overuse of reliable patterns ("Standard Operating Procedures" etc.)3. To allow for degrees of success, not binary pass/fail (e.g. ratios of success to fails in an SC, PbtA-like success ranges, etc.)4. Opening design space, e.g. coordination (ally buffs), rerolls (good or bad), Ad/Dis, etc. More stuff to sink your teeth into.There may be more, but these are the obvious ones. If you don't want dice to make roleplaying redundant, my best advice is...don't? Like just don't do that. If someone rolls and fails, turn it into a spur to action, leverage how they roleplayed and why, turn their move against them, etc.To put it in a different way: Does success not also invalidate roleplay? They could have just rolled a die and been told they get what they want. But I assume you don't do that; instead, success means they did what they set out to do, which may be a mixed bag of their plan was poor or their word choice was unwise or (etc., etc.) In the worst cases (though I would try to diegetically alert the player about this), we wind up with that delightful Windows error meme, "Task failed successfully."Attack rolls don't invalidate battle strategy, be it clever or foolish. They do reveal whether you achieved everything you set out to do in the way you hoped it would happen, but that's not the same thing, and one missed attack roll does not collapse the whole combat.Why should a meatier social system, that goes behind "DM says", be any different?</blockquote>

Verification