D&D General When does the system "work"?

[MGibster]

Call of Cthulhu, for example, was super formative for me, and I’ll always love it. But having to roll under 35% in a skill to advance the investigation (a pretty good skill rating, btw, for obscure skills) makes for constant roadblocks and missed clues, and doesn’t feel like the fiction it’s emulating. Something like Gumshoe or Brindlewood Bay does a much better job, imo, of making investigation interesting, and not tedious or entirely railroady.

I had this problem the first time I was a keeper running the classic adventure "The Haunting." While going to city hall and library to investigate the house, all the investigators failed their relevant skill rolls to churn up information. It was bad. As a new keeper I really had no idea how to handle the situation, so what happened was that they missed out on a lot of important information and they stumbled blindly into the adventure not really understanding what was happening. But starting with 7th edition, the rules actually recommend that you give the investigators whatever clue is necessary for them to get to the next part of the adventure even if they fail a roll.

 

[Quickleaf]

That looks to me like an example of how the system actually works because its effect comes down to judicious use of finite resources. A participant who can safely deploy more dashes should be more likely to win the chase. Blowing through your dashes and hitting a level or two of exhaustion before the competing participant(s) should be considerably hampering.

I've yet to play with a group where players were willing to risk exhaustion to use Dash. But if you know a streamed play of a group using the DMG chase rules with players using the Dash/exhaustion mechanics, I would love to see that. It's just I've never seen it work the way you're describing.

 

[billd91]

I had this problem the first time I was a keeper running the classic adventure "The Haunting." While going to city hall and library to investigate the house, all the investigators failed their relevant skill rolls to churn up information. It was bad. As a new keeper I really had no idea how to handle the situation, so what happened was that they missed out on a lot of important information and they stumbled blindly into the adventure not really understanding what was happening. But starting with 7th edition, the rules actually recommend that you give the investigators whatever clue is necessary for them to get to the next part of the adventure even if they fail a roll.

PCs can also spend luck to improve their success on rolls. If they know that going in, there's a good chance they'll spend it without the Keeper having to give out the necessary clues for free.

 

[billd91]

I've yet to play with a group where players were willing to risk exhaustion to use Dash. But if you know a streamed play of a group using the DMG chase rules with players using the Dash/exhaustion mechanics, I would love to see that. It's just I've never seen it work the way you're describing.

Were they fleeing or pursuing? If they were pursuing and not willing to risk exhaustion, that's great. The system is working as intended. If they were the ones fleeing, what were the stakes of failure? One chase session I ran involved the PCs fleeing like hell in a Ravenloft scenario and the consequences of failing were... not good. They were quite willing to risk exhaustion to get away.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

The system works when I, as DM, realize it is just a tool to accomplish the goals of play: "if everyone had a good time and created a memorable story, they all win."

To me, that means using it as intended, taking accountability for deliberate appropriate use (and inadvertent misuse), and continually working to improve my understanding of intention and application.

 

[loverdrive]

Is the question "When does the system work?" or "When does the system work for you?" Because an answer like "fun" doesn't mean diddly to someone who doesn't share the exact same ideas of fun as someone else.

Of course the second one.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

We’re individuals living a subjective existence with our own thoughts and ideas and are, generally speaking, incapable of a truly objective view of anything. So every question has an implicit or explicit “for you” or “in your opinion” just as every statement has an implicit or explicit “to me” or “in my opinion” attached.

Yes. Every statement has an implicit or explicit "to me" or "in my opinion" attached. And that's going to be a shock for some people who are posting on the 30th page of a thread rebuking someone else's tireless and repeated statements for the last two weeks. But that's not the point.

If your answer is "whatever makes it fun", then obviously you're implying that it is "to me". I'm just trying to gauge if the OP is looking for specific mechanics or ideas in the rulesets that work universally for everybody. Or if this going to be a social fluff piece of opinions...

Of course the second one.

... and there's my answer. Thanks! I'll let you get back to it.

 

[Hriston]

The system is working when the events imagined by the people at the table and the real life means by which they are determined to occur produce the desired play experience, whatever that may be.

 

[Quickleaf]

Were they fleeing or pursuing? If they were pursuing and not willing to risk exhaustion, that's great. The system is working as intended. If they were the ones fleeing, what were the stakes of failure? One chase session I ran involved the PCs fleeing like hell in a Ravenloft scenario and the consequences of failing were... not good. They were quite willing to risk exhaustion to get away.

Well, I haven't exhaustively playtested the chase rules, which is why I'm keen on seeing a live play of a group using the DMG chase rules as written.

However, my first experience with them was running a session for a low level party fleeing a werewolf. The only time the players were willing to risk exhaustion was when one of them was mounted, thinking it would be the horse getting exhausted and not the character.

 

[loverdrive]

A system works when it is not disruptive.

But how does disruptive look like? Like, at which point you could point at the system and say "yup, this naughty word is disruptive and doesn't work"?