DoomHat
2012-03-10, 11:23 PM
Let me say first off that this thread is a modified version of an older one, not related directly to the Chewy D&D project. Here’s the previous edit, containing a rant on the subject of why rewarding failure is so important.
Introduction: Why I feel this is a problem that needs fixing.
The overwhelming majority of RPG’s on the market are Adventure games. In D&D, characters are often referred to as Adventurers! Persons who Adventure.
Here’s how my Word Processor defines the word:
ad·ven·ture [əd vénchər]
n (plural ad·ven·tures)
1. exciting experience: an exciting or extraordinary event or series of events
2. bold undertaking: an undertaking involving uncertainty and risk
3. involvement in bold undertakings: the participation or willingness to participate in things that involve uncertainty and risk
Where's your sense of adventure?
Now, there is a rather serious problem here. Most Players shy way from risk.
Actually that might be understating it. Players spend hours agonizing through character creation, trying to figure out how to realize their character concept without feeling useless when the time comes to roll dice. Then, they dodge situations that fall outside their narrow specialization like the plague.
Why? They’re supposed to be playing Adventurers! Risk should be what they crave!
Well, its because Failure is punished.
This seems reasonable on the face of it. Risk (and thus Adventure) isn’t rewarding without the danger of potential consequences.
So the question is, how can we make Failure fun for the Player, without detracting from the misery of their Character?
Whenever a player fails a non-contested Roll they may choose between 3 consequences.
Hesitate: If the stakes are high and going through with the action would result in injury or otherwise loss of vial resources, the Character stops just short of going through with it. They may not make another attempt for several (in game) minutes or unless something restores their confidence.
Examples: Leaping a chasm, Lying to a King, Attempted to catch something that could potentially shatter/explode in your hands.
{This option is unavailable if the goal of the Roll is to avoid or counter something actively effecting the character, such as; A saving throw to resist a spell effect, outrunning a bear, dodging falling debris}
Sacrifice: The character succeeds after all, but at a price or with some caveat.
Examples: You pick the lock but the noise of your efforts draws unwanted attention, You just barley make it to the other side and are now clinging on for dear life, The DM gives you two pieces of information from your knowledge check but you don’t know which is false.
{This option is unavailable if the DM feels the action you are attempting is to far outside your abilities to reasonably expect success of any kind.}
Fumble: Everything goes horribly wrong. In exchange for the player having the gusts to pick this option, the DM awards them a small (but tantalizing) amount of Exp..
What is Doomhat’s Chewy D&D?
I think there shouldn’t be a dividing wall between Fluff and Crunch.
When ‘Fluff’ has no real effect on Crunch, it’s utterly meaningless. (I hate that)
When ‘Crunch’ fails to serve, live up to, or even have Fluff, that’s recreational math. (Terrible!)
I want to play some D&D 3rd/Pathfinder, but I want more ‘Chewy’ mechanics. I want Fluff and Crunch that flow together until one is nearly indistinguishable from the other.
I’d like you to help me come up with some. Here are the ground rules;
1. It’s not about what the player CAN do, it’s about what they Will do.
Strange abilities and tasty skill bonuses are not an End but a Means of rewarding players for interesting Roleplay. In other words, it’s not about just throwing fireballs. It’s about hating someone or thing so much that you’re willing to wad a reeking lump of sulfur and bat poop between your palms in order to make them explode.
2. Write Good rules for Good Players.
I don’t care what Twinky McPowergame might do with these rules, he’s not even invited. If anything these rules might help ease them into the concept of Roleplaying in the first place. RPG’s are a social game driven by collaboration and imagination, making the spirit of a rule clear is all that matters. We fear no lawyers here.
3. A Plug-in, not a Patch.
We’re not trying to ‘fix’ the game, or reinvent the wheel. Part of the fun of this project is to make D&D a more narrative focused game without removing a single word from the Player’s Guide.
Links to related Threads
[Doomhat’s Chewy D&D Mechanics]: Introduction and some General Feats
(http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13269195#post13269195)
Here are the rules for task resolution Copy Pasted out of the Pathfinder SRD.
Skill Checks
When your character uses a skill, he isn't guaranteed success. In order to determine success, whenever you attempt to use a skill, you must make a skill check.
Each skill rank grants a +1 bonus on checks made using that skill. When you make a skill check, you roll 1d20 and then add your ranks and the appropriate ability score modifier to the result of this check. If the skill you're using is a class skill (and you have invested ranks into that skill), you gain a +3 bonus on the check. If you are not trained in the skill (and if the skill may be used untrained), you may still attempt the skill, but you use only the bonus (or penalty) provided by the associated ability score modifier to modify the check. Skills can be further modified by a wide variety of sources—by your race, by a class ability, by equipment, by spell effects or magic items, and so on. See Table: Skill Check Bonuses for a summary of skill check bonuses.
[Table]
If the result of your skill check is equal to or greater than the difficulty class (or DC) of the task you are attempting to accomplish, you succeed. If it is less than the DC, you fail. Some tasks have varying levels of success and failure depending on how much your check is above or below the required DC. Some skill checks are opposed by the target's skill check. When making an opposed skill check, the attempt is successful if your check result exceeds the result of the target.
You may notice that something rather important is missing here. How do you define failure? Success is a pretty strait forward proposition but Failure could mean anything from wasted time to lost limbs. This is less than ideal!
So let’s flush that out and while we’re at it, give player’s a little more control over their own destinies.
Failure:
Whenever a player fails a roll, they choose one of the following three results:
Hesitate: You pull back at the last moment, saving face and avoiding injury. Depending on the nature of the action you’ll typically have to wait a couple minutes or until next round to try again.
Examples: Suddenly skidding to a stop at the lip of that chasm instead of the ill-advised leap you were planning, lying to the King might not be the best option after all, On second thought if you did catch that thing it might shatter/explode in your hands.
{This option is unavailable if the goal of the Roll is to avoid or counter something actively effecting the character, such as; A saving throw to resist a spell effect, outrunning a bear, dodging falling debris}
Compromise : The character succeeds after all, but at a price or with some caveat.
Examples: You pick the lock but the noise of your efforts draws unwanted attention, You just barley make it to the other side and are now clinging on for dear life, The DM gives you two pieces of information from your knowledge check but you don’t know which is false.
{1. This option is unavailable if the DM feels the action you are attempting is too far outside your abilities to reasonably expect success of any kind.}
{2. If this is a Contested roll you'll have to work out the terms of the Compromise with the winner. However, as this is typically the DM, no change.}
Fumble: Everything goes horribly wrong. In exchange for the player having the gusts to pick this option, the DM awards them a small (but tantalizing) amount of Exp..
(About CharacterLevel X 50exp.?).
Introduction: Why I feel this is a problem that needs fixing.
The overwhelming majority of RPG’s on the market are Adventure games. In D&D, characters are often referred to as Adventurers! Persons who Adventure.
Here’s how my Word Processor defines the word:
ad·ven·ture [əd vénchər]
n (plural ad·ven·tures)
1. exciting experience: an exciting or extraordinary event or series of events
2. bold undertaking: an undertaking involving uncertainty and risk
3. involvement in bold undertakings: the participation or willingness to participate in things that involve uncertainty and risk
Where's your sense of adventure?
Now, there is a rather serious problem here. Most Players shy way from risk.
Actually that might be understating it. Players spend hours agonizing through character creation, trying to figure out how to realize their character concept without feeling useless when the time comes to roll dice. Then, they dodge situations that fall outside their narrow specialization like the plague.
Why? They’re supposed to be playing Adventurers! Risk should be what they crave!
Well, its because Failure is punished.
This seems reasonable on the face of it. Risk (and thus Adventure) isn’t rewarding without the danger of potential consequences.
So the question is, how can we make Failure fun for the Player, without detracting from the misery of their Character?
Whenever a player fails a non-contested Roll they may choose between 3 consequences.
Hesitate: If the stakes are high and going through with the action would result in injury or otherwise loss of vial resources, the Character stops just short of going through with it. They may not make another attempt for several (in game) minutes or unless something restores their confidence.
Examples: Leaping a chasm, Lying to a King, Attempted to catch something that could potentially shatter/explode in your hands.
{This option is unavailable if the goal of the Roll is to avoid or counter something actively effecting the character, such as; A saving throw to resist a spell effect, outrunning a bear, dodging falling debris}
Sacrifice: The character succeeds after all, but at a price or with some caveat.
Examples: You pick the lock but the noise of your efforts draws unwanted attention, You just barley make it to the other side and are now clinging on for dear life, The DM gives you two pieces of information from your knowledge check but you don’t know which is false.
{This option is unavailable if the DM feels the action you are attempting is to far outside your abilities to reasonably expect success of any kind.}
Fumble: Everything goes horribly wrong. In exchange for the player having the gusts to pick this option, the DM awards them a small (but tantalizing) amount of Exp..
What is Doomhat’s Chewy D&D?
I think there shouldn’t be a dividing wall between Fluff and Crunch.
When ‘Fluff’ has no real effect on Crunch, it’s utterly meaningless. (I hate that)
When ‘Crunch’ fails to serve, live up to, or even have Fluff, that’s recreational math. (Terrible!)
I want to play some D&D 3rd/Pathfinder, but I want more ‘Chewy’ mechanics. I want Fluff and Crunch that flow together until one is nearly indistinguishable from the other.
I’d like you to help me come up with some. Here are the ground rules;
1. It’s not about what the player CAN do, it’s about what they Will do.
Strange abilities and tasty skill bonuses are not an End but a Means of rewarding players for interesting Roleplay. In other words, it’s not about just throwing fireballs. It’s about hating someone or thing so much that you’re willing to wad a reeking lump of sulfur and bat poop between your palms in order to make them explode.
2. Write Good rules for Good Players.
I don’t care what Twinky McPowergame might do with these rules, he’s not even invited. If anything these rules might help ease them into the concept of Roleplaying in the first place. RPG’s are a social game driven by collaboration and imagination, making the spirit of a rule clear is all that matters. We fear no lawyers here.
3. A Plug-in, not a Patch.
We’re not trying to ‘fix’ the game, or reinvent the wheel. Part of the fun of this project is to make D&D a more narrative focused game without removing a single word from the Player’s Guide.
Links to related Threads
[Doomhat’s Chewy D&D Mechanics]: Introduction and some General Feats
(http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13269195#post13269195)
Here are the rules for task resolution Copy Pasted out of the Pathfinder SRD.
Skill Checks
When your character uses a skill, he isn't guaranteed success. In order to determine success, whenever you attempt to use a skill, you must make a skill check.
Each skill rank grants a +1 bonus on checks made using that skill. When you make a skill check, you roll 1d20 and then add your ranks and the appropriate ability score modifier to the result of this check. If the skill you're using is a class skill (and you have invested ranks into that skill), you gain a +3 bonus on the check. If you are not trained in the skill (and if the skill may be used untrained), you may still attempt the skill, but you use only the bonus (or penalty) provided by the associated ability score modifier to modify the check. Skills can be further modified by a wide variety of sources—by your race, by a class ability, by equipment, by spell effects or magic items, and so on. See Table: Skill Check Bonuses for a summary of skill check bonuses.
[Table]
If the result of your skill check is equal to or greater than the difficulty class (or DC) of the task you are attempting to accomplish, you succeed. If it is less than the DC, you fail. Some tasks have varying levels of success and failure depending on how much your check is above or below the required DC. Some skill checks are opposed by the target's skill check. When making an opposed skill check, the attempt is successful if your check result exceeds the result of the target.
You may notice that something rather important is missing here. How do you define failure? Success is a pretty strait forward proposition but Failure could mean anything from wasted time to lost limbs. This is less than ideal!
So let’s flush that out and while we’re at it, give player’s a little more control over their own destinies.
Failure:
Whenever a player fails a roll, they choose one of the following three results:
Hesitate: You pull back at the last moment, saving face and avoiding injury. Depending on the nature of the action you’ll typically have to wait a couple minutes or until next round to try again.
Examples: Suddenly skidding to a stop at the lip of that chasm instead of the ill-advised leap you were planning, lying to the King might not be the best option after all, On second thought if you did catch that thing it might shatter/explode in your hands.
{This option is unavailable if the goal of the Roll is to avoid or counter something actively effecting the character, such as; A saving throw to resist a spell effect, outrunning a bear, dodging falling debris}
Compromise : The character succeeds after all, but at a price or with some caveat.
Examples: You pick the lock but the noise of your efforts draws unwanted attention, You just barley make it to the other side and are now clinging on for dear life, The DM gives you two pieces of information from your knowledge check but you don’t know which is false.
{1. This option is unavailable if the DM feels the action you are attempting is too far outside your abilities to reasonably expect success of any kind.}
{2. If this is a Contested roll you'll have to work out the terms of the Compromise with the winner. However, as this is typically the DM, no change.}
Fumble: Everything goes horribly wrong. In exchange for the player having the gusts to pick this option, the DM awards them a small (but tantalizing) amount of Exp..
(About CharacterLevel X 50exp.?).