• polonius-rex@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    if you don’t even roll, then you’re robbing your players from the feeling of a near miss

    also taken to its extreme, your players will probably just work out that they aren’t going to die at all and start taking stupid risks that they shouldn’t

    and yeah, at that point you can punish them, but you’ve been responsible for them getting to that state in the first place, so you’re essentially punishing them for your own mistakes

    • papalonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is another thing I fear, that causes me to do probably unnecessary rolls. I want the story/ gameplay to have at least some semblance of believability, so I don’t want everyone risking their life on a curiosity because they know I won’t kill them, but I also don’t want to “punish” players every time they take a step off the walking path.

      I’ll admit it right here: sometimes I roll the dice just to give the illusion of risk, when in reality I’m buying time to make up the results of what someone just did.

      • ZycroNeXuS@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I occasionally roll dice as theatre myself. In my last session, I had a troupe of traveling performers that I rolled for on each act to see if they did well or not, with each roll hidden from the players, and I would then describe the outcome to them. Most of the rolls were real, but some performers I had already decided would fail from the beginning, because they were plants for the enemy faction and had a plan going on in the background that depended on their failure at the act. But of course I still had to roll to not set off any alarms. Going to be fun when my players later piece together “oh, that hypnotist didn’t actually fail, they just used mass suggestion to make everybody believe they did so they don’t come under scrutiny.” If a player catches on - one actually did pretty quick - then great, let them have the victory, but in general it’s one of the ways I like to create expectations so I can subvert them or use them to sneak things by. The enemy faction is very guerilla-oriented, so it fits their MO pretty well.

        On a more general scale, when it comes to hidden rolls, if I really need something to succeed, I’ll make the roll not a matter of whether they succeed, but who succeeds. Keeps the story moving if I realize too late that that roll shouldn’t have happened because a failure brings the game to a halt.

        • papalonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I really like the “who succeeds” idea. In events where I roll a fail and have no idea what to do with it, I can just have the outcome only happen for certain characters, or tweak the “success” so that it isn’t quite so successful. Haha.

      • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        You can roll some dice but it doesn’t need to be a skill check (or whatever the naming is in your system of choice). When I don’t know what should happen, I may roll a die. If it’s high then it should be something good and if low, maybe it will give me inspiration to think about some new lurking danger. But I may discard the result and go with the gut feeling. Whatever, it was an “oracle roll” as I like to call it. Not tied to anyone’s statistics.

        I like to use a deck of cards as well. In Savage Worlds, it is used to determine a random encounter. Clubs indicate an enemy, hearts a friebd, diamonds some good omen and spades obstacles. I like to draw a card so it inspires me on what should happen next (of course as long as it makes sense with the world)

          • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I was worried someone might take it this way. Fudging rolls means stating the result of a secret roll was different than it was in reality. What I’m talking about is using a die to inspire you what should happen in a situation where rolling is not applicable. Players decide to go to the sewers for some reason. What’s in there? I don’t know. Yet. There are no rules on what to roll when they go to the sewers now. I may ask them what they expect to find. I may draw a card. I may roll a die. I may consult the random encounters table. It’s not a “roll” in the gaming sense, it’s a way to get some inspiration on my next description. But it’s like with a coin toss, sometimes you know what should happen when you make the roll and before you even see the result.

            • polonius-rex@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Fudging rolls means stating the result of a secret roll was different than it was in reality

              which is what you’re doing when you ignore it…? otherwise you wouldn’t be ignoring it

              • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Because the result has no meaning, it’s not a roll in a gaming sense. It being 20 or 1 makes no difference, it’s just to spark something in the imagination.

                • polonius-rex@kbin.run
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  it has the meaning you assigned to it before rolling it, whether or not you’re pulling that meaning from a specific table, and whether or not you reveal the system to the players

                  if you decide ahead of time that a low result is going to be a tough encounter, and a high result is going to be a pile of treasure, then it comes up low and you decide to ignore that and give them treasure instead based on your gut feeling, you’re fudging the roll

                  if you decide what’s going to happen next based on your pull from a tarot deck, and somehow get “death” four times in a row, anything less than a disaster scenario is fudging the roll

                  it’s the exact same instinct that leads to “hmm, maybe this piss shit little goblin shouldn’t decapitate the barbarian in one hit because it happened to roll well”

                  • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    But that’s the whole point, I don’t know beforehand what any result would mean. Yeah, generally by habit you think higher roll is good and low is bad but you can’t apply it to every scenario. Let me visualize how it works for me

                    “What’s in the sewers? I don’t know, let me see. I rolled 14. Maybe it’s something good? Maybe someone friendly? No, it doens’t make sense in this context. It should probably be a hideout of crocodile people gang.”

                    Did I know 14 would mean that? Should it? Is it good? Bad? I could also not roll. I could use a coffee stain to decide. I could toss a paper clip.

                    Personally I don’t consider it as fudging rolls just because dice is involved. There are no procedures. I use it to guide my imagination because I have it right here before me. Tarot deck? Usually not, but it’s also a fantastic tool to do so and you may interpret it however you want. But I agree with you that drawing death 3 times is rather self explanatory and it’s an obvious disaster (also what a fun one!). But a die result is just a number without meaning, it only gives me a starting point for my thoughts. It’s a habit; a tick; a real object that binds me with the virtual world. Not a roll to hit or a skills check.

                    If that’s fudging rolls for you then I guess I need to stir up some dice to get my flow going.

    • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      RPGs depend on mutual respect. If you think your players will metagame you and you need to punish them then it stops being a collaborative roleplaying game.

      • polonius-rex@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        okay then, for you the game ends here:

        your players will probably just work out that they aren’t going to die at all and start taking stupid risks that they shouldn’t

        you can’t just not metagame

        if you know a choice will result in a certain outcome, you can no longer make that decision neutrally

        in fact, you literally can’t take a risk when you know what the outcome of a choice is, because there’s no risk to take

        not even bothering to roll is barely a step removed from just telling your players “i’m not going to make the enemy roll to hit you because then you might die and you haven’t found your long lost brother yet”, and if you can’t see that that’s a garbage scenario for roleplaying i don’t know what to tell you

        • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m all for rolls that make sense. If it’s an encounter, of course you should always roll. I roll in the open and players know what hit them and whatnot. The consequence is damage and/or death. But if you’re a thief and want to open a simple lock and nobody’s is trying to defenestrate you at the moment? No need to roll, failure is meaningless. You just killed a dragon? No need to persuade the king to help you. That’s a reward for doing something beforehand. But oh my if an orc swings at you with his axe I’m gonna roll the dice right in front of you so you know that critical was not fudged.

          I skip rolls if players are either super prepared or their failure will not mean anything. But as I said earlier, it needs trust between players and the GM - I don’t make their lives harder as a punishment, I do that for the storytelling. And they don’t try to work around me because we skipped a roll for athletics when they had a full day to climb a tree.

          Oh but that reminds me. I was metagamed recently. When the team tried to decide what to do with a defeated enemy one of them said “let him live, he will come back as a sidequest. When we kill him then that plotline is dead as well”.

          Well he was not wrong but that needn’t to be said.

          • polonius-rex@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            But if you’re a thief and want to open a simple lock and nobody’s is trying to defenestrate you at the moment? No need to roll, failure is meaningless. You just killed a dragon? No need to persuade the king to help you.

            this conversation is specifically talking about when you’re in a scenario where you logically need to make a roll, but where a bad roll coming up essentially ruins things for both the gm and players

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      There are more better ways to make a player fear for their character other than death.

      Like killing a beloved NPC, making the situation much worse, taking away their valuables, making their god angry, being hunted by assassins, making them wanted across the kingdom.

      Death isn’t the only punishment a GM/DM has at their disposal.

      • polonius-rex@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        sometimes allowing an outcome that should mechanically via the rules of the game and logically via the rules of common sense has more downsides than upsides

        it doesn’t have to refer to exclusively player death