How to make downtime tasks less of a "see if the dice let you succeed"?

[TyGuy]

There's puzzles for dungeons and strategy for combat. But from what I've seen for downtime, there's not really any meaningful player involvement. It's just roll the dice, see if you are lucky enough to get what you want. Even multi-step processes are usually just more chances to fail/pass the luck hurdles.
XGtE has an option to pour more time and money into the task to increase the odds of success. There's also the crafting quests to get components.

But what would a system look like that involves player decision making or problem solving that could be a fun way, a better way, to do downtime activities like training a dangerous pet or creating a first of its kind potion? Got any successful systems or reference material?

[Frogreaver]

There's puzzles for dungeons and strategy for combat. But from what I've seen for downtime, there's not really any meaningful player involvement. It's just roll the dice, see if you are lucky enough to get what you want. Even multi-step processes are usually just more chances to fail/pass the luck hurdles.
XGtE has an option to pour more time and money into the task to increase the odds of success. There's also the crafting quests to get components.

But what would a system look like that involves player decision making or problem solving that could be a fun way, a better way, to do downtime activities like training a dangerous pet or creating a first of its kind potion? Got any successful systems or reference material?

Fact: There is limited time in a given session.
Query: Will your players have more fun spending that time on downtime to try and get some buff or will they have more fun spending it on actual adventuring?

If you answer as I suspect then I'd propose you want to handwave downtime as much as possible. So perhaps a system that does that. You spend time and money training in downtime. How much time and money you spend determines what you must do while adventuring to become fully trained. Perhaps X Gold and Y Time might mean you need to succeed on your next 3 of N attempts in the adventure at a related task. Particularly hard tasks may count as an additional successes. If you fail you'll have to spend time and gold to try again.

Training a dangerous pet would involve spending time and gold training it but you can't be certain it's trained till you test it out on an adventure. Succeed on 3 animal handling rolls to control the pet out of 6 in your next adventure and the pet is fully trained.

Etc.

[Pex]

Depends if the players would like this.

Every once in a while a game session can occur where it's all roleplay. There's no combat, no exploring, maybe even nothing campaign plot related though it can as the narrative warrants. The players interact with themselves and NPCs they know or visit in a city or town. It's all improv talk and not a die is rolled. This often happens in the game session after the BBEG of the adventuring arc fight. Players still want to come to the session to play the game, but in that fun it's nice to have a relaxing session without anxiety, pressure, excitement, suspense, danger of normal adventuring. This is when PCs do downtime stuff involving personal quests. If a player wants to make something he makes it. If a player wants to research something he finds it. No die rolls. No tables to look up. There is no system other than everyone's imagination playing Make Believe.

As stereotypes, the barbarian becomes a sports hero in the fighting pit. The bard gains fame performing. The cleric is requested by the populace for blessings and performing ceremonies. Nobles approach the paladin hoping to gain the ear of the up and coming heroes of the realm.

[Kane0]

There's puzzles for dungeons and strategy for combat. But from what I've seen for downtime, there's not really any meaningful player involvement. It's just roll the dice, see if you are lucky enough to get what you want. Even multi-step processes are usually just more chances to fail/pass the luck hurdles.
XGtE has an option to pour more time and money into the task to increase the odds of success. There's also the crafting quests to get components.

But what would a system look like that involves player decision making or problem solving that could be a fun way, a better way, to do downtime activities like training a dangerous pet or creating a first of its kind potion? Got any successful systems or reference material?

How deep a system are you looking for? Something that can be resolved by one player/PC in under 2-10 minutes or something that will involve the party for half an hour or more?

[Tanarii]

Downtime isn't supposed to take significant table time. That's why they're at most a simple system, if any system at all. So they can knocked out with some quick between session communication, or in a few minutes at the beginning or end of a session.

[Composer99]

Anything worth doing only in downtime is probably not worth having any kind of detailed implementation.

If your players want to spend extra time on some activity that might have otherwise been downtime and you want a mixture of player decision-making and die rolls to decide what happens, it's probably better to create an ad hoc encounter structure for that specific occasion rather than expand upon downtime activities as such. (If this was 4e, I'd suggest a skill challenge.)

[Mastikator]

Downtime can and should be done between sessions.

The xanathar's rules that determine how successful you are instead determine how much gold you need to spend. IMO it shouldn't be a mini game that you can master.

[Asisreo1]

There's puzzles for dungeons and strategy for combat. But from what I've seen for downtime, there's not really any meaningful player involvement. It's just roll the dice, see if you are lucky enough to get what you want. Even multi-step processes are usually just more chances to fail/pass the luck hurdles.
XGtE has an option to pour more time and money into the task to increase the odds of success. There's also the crafting quests to get components.

But what would a system look like that involves player decision making or problem solving that could be a fun way, a better way, to do downtime activities like training a dangerous pet or creating a first of its kind potion? Got any successful systems or reference material?

I'll be going against the grain but I've found much success using whole sessions as downtime and players enjoying it.

Firstly, there's nothing preventing strategy or puzzles during downtime, you simply switch the flavors.

Rather than strategizing how your character will position their fireball for maximum damage with minimal backfire, you can strategize how to adjudicate your limited time to advancing your goals. As a DM, there should be obvious, fulfilling rewards for pursuing those goals as well. And "no take backsies." If your players earned a family, they earned it. You wouldn't say "congrats! You beat the beholder," then turn around and say "actually, he's back alive and he kills your character." Even if you try to make it dramatic, it usually ends up feeling cheap.

Rather than solving a puzzle by moving stones to locate a key, perhaps you can solve how to spend your limited resources in an advantageous way for you. As a DM, reward them by having actually wealthy people surround themselves with them and help them without stabbing them in the back later. Rather than a trecherous relationship, there can simply be some mutual relationship. It's about having friends in high-places that can get you cool, valuable magic items or legal/criminal protections.

[JonBeowulf]

I'll be going against the grain but I've found much success using whole sessions as downtime and players enjoying it.

This would bore me to death. It splits the party into a bunch of solo missions and everyone sits there while one person at a time does their thing. I only care what another character is doing during downtime if our goals coincide.

If the whole group wants to work on a project, then I wouldn't consider it downtime.

For the OP, the only way I can think of to make downtime activities more interesting is for the players to tell the DM what they want to do well in advance so the DM can come up with small missions they need to accomplish first. They need to find the ingredients or visit the blacksmith's extended family 'cause his mother-in-law is deathly ill or track down that street urchin everyone's been talking about.

[Asisreo1]

This would bore me to death. It splits the party into a bunch of solo missions and everyone sits there while one person at a time does their thing. I only care what another character is doing during downtime if our goals coincide.

It's actually quite nice to be able to disengage and hang back or be an audience at your leisure. While one player is doing their thing, the others can socialize on the side, eat pizza, or spectate freely. Plus, you can always randomly have the another player's character get involved in the plot of another's.

Like, you're chasing down the thief that stole from your parents and the thief crashes into the house of another player. Or the ally of one PC is the sworn rival of another. You can weave the story to have individual arcs still be individual but also have a place for other characters to get together when needed or desired.

[TyGuy]

Fact: There is limited time in a given session.
Query: Will your players have more fun spending that time on downtime to try and get some buff or will they have more fun spending it on actual adventuring?


Downtime can, and often should, be dealt with between sessions. Even the straight forward and uninvolved "see if the rolls let you win" method eats up considerable time with multiple players describing what they want to achieve and then rolling.


Downtime can and should be done between sessions.

The xanathar's rules that determine how successful you are instead determine how much gold you need to spend. IMO it shouldn't be a mini game that you can master.

Still scrolling and saw this after posting. This is what I'm getting at. Each combat is its own mini game to resolve. As is each dungeon puzzle. If I have a player that wants to train a circus owlbear over the course of months of in-game time, my current offerings are kinda weak. Instead of tying up the party and table time, or just "roll to pass/fail" I would appreciate a mini game in which the decisions can be made between sessions and 5 minutes before each session starts a roll or two to resolve the decisions made. Something that has actual player involvement and consequences.

[Goobahfish]

So this depends on the task, but yes, a check to train an Owlbear is lame.

The question you need to ask yourself, is whether:
A) Partial success is possible.
B) Player agency is meaningful.

If both A & B is true, then 'a check' is indeed pretty poor. A good example is that some players like to roleplay bartering and having a simple bartering system can be rewarding. Similarly, having a simple 'training the owlbear' mini-game can likewise be fun.

The important thing is to make it interesting mechanically (i.e. player agency is meaningful) and there are more outcomes than success/fail.

Perhaps you need to work out what your Owlbear really likes (which can be roleplayed) to determine the best reward. Perhaps training badly could result in the player being injured, or the owlbear resulting in 'healing costs' or a short-lasting disadvantage. Perhaps a half-trained owlbear might go berserk in combat or break out of their enclosure (actual adventuring).

What you need is something akin to Blackjack, where the player has the option of 'pushing their luck'. Perhaps they can make an arbitrary number of checks (0-5) and for each success there is a benefit, but if any number is rolled twice (naturally) there is also a bad consequence and something catastrophic if two nat-1's are rolled.

[Yakk]

If you want downtime to be interesting, maybe take a page from games that are nothing but downtime. Like "the quiet year".

Or go with something a bit crunchier. Like a card game, and the player plays 3 card monte, building a narrative with vaguely tarot themed cards.

[TyGuy]

Perhaps you need to work out what your Owlbear really likes (which can be roleplayed) to determine the best reward. Perhaps training badly could result in the player being injured, or the owlbear resulting in 'healing costs' or a short-lasting disadvantage. Perhaps a half-trained owlbear might go berserk in combat or break out of their enclosure (actual adventuring).
This is my first thought and fallback method. Run it like any other dungeon equation of preparing a set of requirements with DC's accompanied with hints and discovery. To use the previous owlbear example, it might look something like.
Step 1, find positive reinforcement. DC 14 animal handling to discover it like scratches behind the head. A roll of 4 or less results in a minor injury. And a DC 16 nature check to discover what treats it likes, which will lower the DC of future tasks.
Step 2, find negative reinforcement.... etc.

Drawbacks to this method alone are that there's really no way for the player to tell just how much impact their decisions are making, and it can turn right back into "roll to pass/fail" quickly. It does, however, open up the potential for the player to introduce new ideas that the DM incorporate just like running an open ended puzzle.



What you need is something akin to Blackjack, where the player has the option of 'pushing their luck'. Perhaps they can make an arbitrary number of checks (0-5) and for each success there is a benefit, but if any number is rolled twice (naturally) there is also a bad consequence and something catastrophic if two nat-1's are rolled.
Now we're getting somewhere! A 'push your luck' mechanic is perfect for this sort of thing. Something in which the player understands they have a choice to go slow and steady vs fast and risk setbacks. If not for the whole goal, this would at least work for one or more sub-tasks.

[KorvinStarmast]

If the whole group wants to work on a project, then I wouldn't consider it downtime.

For the OP, the only way I can think of to make downtime activities more interesting is for the players to tell the DM what they want to do well in advance so the DM can come up with small missions they need to accomplish first. They need to find the ingredients or visit the blacksmith's extended family 'cause his mother-in-law is deathly ill or track down that street urchin everyone's been talking about. I like this, but I try to get players engaged between sessions (email and discord chat is a thing) for down time decisions and efforts. Only three of five care to answer, as a rule, so those are the three who tend to get the detailed benefit of down time. (If you are not gonna meet me half way, your loss).

The question you need to ask yourself, is whether:
A) Partial success is possible.
B) Player agency is meaningful.
{snip}
What you need is something akin to Blackjack, where the player has the option of 'pushing their luck'. Perhaps they can make an arbitrary number of checks (0-5) and for each success there is a benefit, but if any number is rolled twice (naturally) there is also a bad consequence and something catastrophic if two nat-1's are rolled. Nice idea: risk / reward tension.

If you want downtime to be interesting, maybe take a page from games that are nothing but downtime. Like "the quiet year". not a bad idea

Or go with something a bit crunchier. Like a card game, and the player plays 3 card monte, building a narrative with vaguely tarot themed cards. Ooh, interesting, except my wife made me throw away my tarot cards two decades ago. (I kid you not).

[PhantomSoul]

What you need is something akin to Blackjack, where the player has the option of 'pushing their luck'. Perhaps they can make an arbitrary number of checks (0-5) and for each success there is a benefit, but if any number is rolled twice (naturally) there is also a bad consequence and something catastrophic if two nat-1's are rolled.

For probabilities (using only a single die size each time for simplicity, though maybe that's non-ideal) (also cf. the time/risk pool from AngryGM, which overlaps a bit but not perfectly and it or an adaptation might be an option):




1 roll
2 rolls
3 rolls
4 rolls
5 rolls
6 rolls
7+ rolls


d4
0%
25%
37.5%
28.13%
9.38%
0%
0%


d6
0%
16.67%
27.78%
27.78%
18.52%
7.72%
1.54%


d8
0%
12.5%
21.88%
24.61%
20.51%
12.82%
7.69%


d10
0%
10%
18%
21.6%
20.16%
15.12%
15.12%


d12
0%
8.33%
15.28%
19.1%
19.1%
15.91%
22.28%



(This tells you when you end a streak of rolling, so rows total 100%. If that set of rolls ends at the fourth die, for example, it's not getting a fifth or sixth roll.)

[Zhorn]

Downtime isn't supposed to take significant table time. That's why they're at most a simple system, if any system at all. So they can knocked out with some quick between session communication, or in a few minutes at the beginning or end of a session.
Very much this. If my campaigns have downtime, they are set up at the end of a session with an outline of what the players plan on doing, players can then PM me during the week with any extra details on what they want to do, and the next session opens with a quick round table of results before going back to adventuring.

Success for downtime I tend to treat as a reliable given, with complications rolled at my end if players were being risky, or are in serious need of some new quest hooks to launch next session.

Last downtime started off the next session with a player having been recruited into a theatre group, and the players then thwarted an assassination attempt. All their activities for the downtime 'just worked', and the complications just acted as a "and now we launch out of the peaceful life back into high adventure and mystery once more"

[Goobahfish]

For probabilities (using only a single die size each time for simplicity, though maybe that's non-ideal) (also cf. the time/risk pool from AngryGM, which overlaps a bit but not perfectly and it or an adaptation might be an option):
{snip}
(This tells you when you end a streak of rolling, so rows total 100%. If that set of rolls ends at the fourth die, for example, it's not getting a fifth or sixth roll.)

I am a bit confused about those probabilities I must admit. Shouldn't the probability of failure just increase with increased die rolls?

I had assumed it would be done with a D20 like a normal check. A lot of tasks would need several successes to 'progress'. Say, training an owlbear for a trick requires 5 successes in total before it can do it.

Let's say a training sessions takes... a week... or a day (who cares really).

You can roll as many checks as you like (all at once). So you roll 5 checks (because you are ambitious).

Your DC is... 12, bonus +5 meaning you have 70% chance of success on each roll. Lets say your pass 3 of those checks?

BUT... you roll 2 15's => you overworked the bear = BAD. So you have a partially trained Owlbear but there is some bad consequence like you or it are injured (this could be a table roll).

[TyGuy]

I am a bit confused about those probabilities I must admit. Shouldn't the probability of failure just increase with increased die rolls?


You're looking at the probability of failing on that specific roll. Sum the chances up to and including the roll for the total chance of failure for that number of rolls.

[Witty Username]

Downtime in my games generally involves NPCs. Purchases, neighbors, contacts, etc.
One of my party in our suspended game is trying to expand a cult during downtime. This involves alot of social management, PR, recruitment, politics, acquiring property. Furthermore, complications can blur downtime and adventure. Peddling healing can lead to info on a monster in the sewer, or a local vampire. Buying a bunch of materials may lead to a burglary, or require clearing a trade route of bandits.
Arranging what you need could require exploration of whatever area used for downtime, figure out the best routes between the blacksmith, the florist and the inn. Or if the town even has a maison.

[PhantomSoul]

You're looking at the probability of failing on that specific roll. Sum the chances up to and including the roll for the total chance of failure for that number of rolls.

Correct! The outcome seemed more interesting to calculate if needing to decide the number of dice ahead of time or trying to generalise the overall likelihoods.

When deciding at any given step, you must not have had any doubles, to your chance of failure is (current die number - 1)/(size of die). For example, if you're rolling your fourth d6 and they're all d6s, then you've got 3 numbers you can't match and 6 possible numbers being rolled, giving a 50% (3/6) chance of failure.



Die
Roll 1
Roll 2
Roll 3
Roll 4
Roll 5
Roll 6
Roll 7
Roll 8
Roll 9
Roll 10
Roll 11
Roll 12
Roll 13


d4
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


d6
0%
16.7%
33.3%
50%
66.7%
83.3%
100%
-
-
-
-
-
-


d8
0%
12.5%
25%
37.5%
50%
62.5%
75%
87.5%
100%
-
-
-
-


d10
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
-
-


d12
0%
8.3%
16.7%
25%
33.3%
41.7%
50%
58.3%
66.7%
75%
83.3%
91.7%
100%


(To read, the percentage in a cell is the likelihood of failure [adding a die that creates a double] when adding that die after already having successfully gotten to the previous step. So Roll 6 is the chance of failure if you currently have 5 dice rolled and haven't already rolled a double.)

[Veldrenor]

I'll be going against the grain but I've found much success using whole sessions as downtime and players enjoying it.

I do the same. It's absolutely not for everyone, but for my players and my game it works quite well.


This would bore me to death. It splits the party into a bunch of solo missions and everyone sits there while one person at a time does their thing. I only care what another character is doing during downtime if our goals coincide.

This right here is why it's not for everyone. Many players have no interest in what the other players are doing, or in downtime in general. We play games to play and watching someone else play isn't playing. But some players are interested and like the chance to occasionally kick back and be an audience (or Waldorf and Statler).

To the OP, I don't got much to help. I run downtime similarly to what Pex described earlier, I just add the option to "push." For downtime, a character goes to a location in town and spends some time (and maybe some gold) and they succeed, no rolls involved. Or they can choose to push, trying to accomplish the task faster or better than normal. For each downtime activity there are several target DCs. The player picks one DC as their target and rolls an associated ability check. If the check succeeds then they get the better benefit. They can only get the benefit for the DC they chose, so rolling 23 against DC 15 will get them the DC 15 benefit, not the DC 20 benefit. If the check fails then they get nothing; the money and time they put into the activity is wasted, and some activities may have additional consequences. For example, failing a push when trying to sell loot means that they have to wait a month before trying to sell that loot again.

Note that this is for mundane downtime: research, selling loot, carousing, working a day job, etc. For risky and/or adventure-like downtime (gambling, criminal activity, pit fighting, stuff like that), I either make it a skill challenge à la 4e or spin it off into an adventure.

[TyGuy]

I do the same. It's absolutely not for everyone, but for my players and my game it works quite well.



This right here is why it's not for everyone. Many players have no interest in what the other players are doing, or in downtime in general. We play games to play and watching someone else play isn't playing. But some players are interested and like the chance to occasionally kick back and be an audience (or Waldorf and Statler).

To the OP, I don't got much to help. I run downtime similarly to what Pex described earlier, I just add the option to "push." For downtime, a character goes to a location in town and spends some time (and maybe some gold) and they succeed, no rolls involved. Or they can choose to push, trying to accomplish the task faster or better than normal. For each downtime activity there are several target DCs. The player picks one DC as their target and rolls an associated ability check. If the check succeeds then they get the better benefit. They can only get the benefit for the DC they chose, so rolling 23 against DC 15 will get them the DC 15 benefit, not the DC 20 benefit. If the check fails then they get nothing; the money and time they put into the activity is wasted, and some activities may have additional consequences. For example, failing a push when trying to sell loot means that they have to wait a month before trying to sell that loot again.

Note that this is for mundane downtime: research, selling loot, carousing, working a day job, etc. For risky and/or adventure-like downtime (gambling, criminal activity, pit fighting, stuff like that), I either make it a skill challenge à la 4e or spin it off into an adventure.

I think I may be able to work with something like a "choose your poison" task/DC buffet.
Using the ongoing example it might look like:
DC 10 animal handling. Train the owlbear to sit command.
DC 15 animal handling. Train the owlbear to rear on command.
DC 18 animal handling. Train the owlbear to scream on command.

Still roll to pass/fail, but having even a little bit of player agency is a big step in the right direction.

[Greywander]

I only skimmed the thread, but wanted to throw my two cents in.

First, the people saying that downtime should be dealt with between sessions should consider that this may be the correct answer... for some tables. Downtime may bore you to death, but that isn't true of every player. The fact that the OP is asking is an indication that this probably isn't a helpful answer (though it is probably worth stating at least once, because it may, in fact, be the right answer for the OP's table).

For the OP, I recently encountered a system that might be what you're looking for. I'm going to be playing in a 7th Sea game soon (at some point, maybe...), so I read through the rules of the system. TBH, it seems like it's not going to be my cup of tea, but I did find the core resolution mechanic to be quite interesting, and I think it could be useful for what you're trying to do.

The short, oversimplified summary is this: At the top of a round, the player decides what they're trying to do. This then determines which skills/stats to use for rolling. The DM then determines how many successes they need to roll in order to complete their stated goal. But, the DM also creates Consequences that the player must also spend successes on in order to negate them. The DM also adds Opportunities, extra bonuses that can be unlocked by spending successes on them as well. And if the player has successes left over, they can spend them on additional actions in the same round.

The example used in the 7th Sea book was of a player trying to escape a burning room. It costs 1 success to flee the room, so actually doing it isn't too hard. But the consequences are taking two wounds of damage from the fire. Each wound can be negated by spending one success. The player also spots an important document about to be consumed by the fire, and it will cost them one success to grab it before it burns. It takes four successes to execute the action "perfectly", fleeing the room while sustaining no damage and grabbing the letter. If you have fewer successes than that, however, you have to make some tough choices. Would you rather avoid damage, or grab the letter? Maybe you'd rather stay in the room if it means taking no damage (failing your action but negating the consequences). Maybe you want to perform an extra action; perhaps you're being chased and you want to topple a bookcase to block the doorway.

Given that Xanathar's includes tables for downtime complications, you could probably repurpose those for Consequences the players will have to spend successes on to negate. If they don't have enough successes, they may have to choose between succeeding on their downtime activity but incurring the complication, or negating the complication at the cost of wasting the downtime. This can be made more exciting by adding Opportunities that they'll only have one shot at, and so will tempt them to spend precious successes.

As for how you generate successes, that's up to you. In 7th Sea, you add your attribute to your skill to determine how many d10s to roll, then arrange those dice into groups adding up to 10 or more, with each group counting as 1 success. But you could just as easily have them roll a certain number of d20s, add their modifers, and see how many beat a particular DC. I think it would probably work better to lay out the costs for success, the consequences, and the opportunities before they roll, as that will add more tension to the roll than if you wait until afterwards.

[Goobahfish]

The Seventh Sea system sounds interesting.

The only issue I see is that presumably, you just roll however many dice you have and then you get to decide on how it plays out. I.e. if you don't want to take the wounds, you can prioritize that over taking the letter etc etc.

I'd much prefer a system where you choose to dedicate a certain number of dice to each task (from a limited pool). So, if you really want that letter, you could spend three dice to get it, but only two on escaping the room (which you might subsequently fail).

I like giving players agency, but not control. It is also the reason I don't particularly like the :
DC 10 = > Do X
OR
DC 15 = > Do Y
OR
DC 20 = > Do Z.

I much prefer a system which results in some good outcomes, some bad outcomes but not necessarily the ones the player was hoping for/trading for. Maybe you train the owlbear but also get injured rather than just choosing to trade the injury for an untrained owlbear. Maybe both go badly, maybe you train but nothing goes wrong.

It is kind of the rationale behind the roll X dice and doubles = bad because while there is an incentive to roll more dice (more progress), players each have their own risk appetite. Moreover, if there is a fixed number of dice/DCs then there isn't really a choice other than which 'game you want to play' rather than 'how do you want to play'.