Any GM humbled by experience of session and campaign desires to become a better of GM. If there is one lesson we can take from new systems like Numenera and foundational systems like Burning Wheel, it is that RPGs are not about rolling dice. They are about great storytelling. In this segment we are talking about strategies for rolling less and DMing better.
First let's look at a little math. Assume we have a 5% failure rate for something, which is equivalent to rolling a 1 to fail on a d20. Make just one roll, and we have a 5% failure rate. However, make the same player roll that four times, and they now have four times the chance of generating a failure. The basic principle is simple, making a player roll more than one increases the chances of failure.
This leads to all sorts of problems when people alter mechanics. Do you want to have a critical failure mechanic? Now you characters that can roll multiple attacks (i.e. your BETTER characters) now have a higher rate of critical failure. Don't do it. Critical failure mechanics based on rolling failures increase the chance of failures in better characters because they get more rolls. Do you make your thief roll stealth multiple times? If so, you've now made him worse off than the wizard who rolled once and stayed put. Multiple rolls destroy the foundational assumptions about being good at a skill. So what do we do instead?
Let's introduce two important concepts, taken from other gaming systems that really apply. Let it ride. "Let it ride" says that outcome of a roll stays valid until something major changes. It avoids the escalating failure rate problem and makes for less dice rolling.
Our second concept is "Don't Roll unless It Matters", which states that you don't roll unless the story line will accept both failure and success as making the plot more interesting. First, it means you roll less dice. Give characters success on things they are good at. Give them successes when the outcome doesn't matter. Now, also it means that the outcomes of a roll don't have to be just simple success and failure. Instead think of them as "success" and "interesting but not ideal for the character". Failure on a use magic device check -- maybe the magic items does something different or more weakly. Failure on a stealth check -- maybe you now have a cat following you. Failure on a disguise check -- now you look exactly like the guard's father, and he's going to come talk to you.
Now in D&D 5e have this wonderful new concept of passive skills. Passive skills are equivalent to the old Pathfinder version of 'taking a ten', but they are always available without player interaction. They give the GM a wonderful new way for judging things without rolls. For example, perception is one of those things we used to have the players roll for over and over again. With passive perception we just use the passive value and only ask for dice to be rolled when a player indicates that their character is actively using perception. Walk through a dungeon, check passive perception when traps are encountered, and roll when characters are "looking for traps" or "searching a room". It is wonderful.
Now let's lump in all the other tricks for rolling less. Unless there is a significant (i.e. 5 to 10) different in initiative modifiers for foes, only roll one initiatives for foes. In addition, only roll initiative once per encounter. In addition, allow PCs, their animal companions, and other related animals to act all on the same initiative. To speed things up, always roll attack and damage rolls together.
Now taken altogether, all these rules of rolling can significantly cut down on the number of rolls to be made and adjudicated, resulting in more time for focusing on roleplay and plot. Focusing on the storytelling will make you a better GM and make your players happier, and isn't that what all GMs want?
First let's look at a little math. Assume we have a 5% failure rate for something, which is equivalent to rolling a 1 to fail on a d20. Make just one roll, and we have a 5% failure rate. However, make the same player roll that four times, and they now have four times the chance of generating a failure. The basic principle is simple, making a player roll more than one increases the chances of failure.
This leads to all sorts of problems when people alter mechanics. Do you want to have a critical failure mechanic? Now you characters that can roll multiple attacks (i.e. your BETTER characters) now have a higher rate of critical failure. Don't do it. Critical failure mechanics based on rolling failures increase the chance of failures in better characters because they get more rolls. Do you make your thief roll stealth multiple times? If so, you've now made him worse off than the wizard who rolled once and stayed put. Multiple rolls destroy the foundational assumptions about being good at a skill. So what do we do instead?
Let's introduce two important concepts, taken from other gaming systems that really apply. Let it ride. "Let it ride" says that outcome of a roll stays valid until something major changes. It avoids the escalating failure rate problem and makes for less dice rolling.
Our second concept is "Don't Roll unless It Matters", which states that you don't roll unless the story line will accept both failure and success as making the plot more interesting. First, it means you roll less dice. Give characters success on things they are good at. Give them successes when the outcome doesn't matter. Now, also it means that the outcomes of a roll don't have to be just simple success and failure. Instead think of them as "success" and "interesting but not ideal for the character". Failure on a use magic device check -- maybe the magic items does something different or more weakly. Failure on a stealth check -- maybe you now have a cat following you. Failure on a disguise check -- now you look exactly like the guard's father, and he's going to come talk to you.
Now in D&D 5e have this wonderful new concept of passive skills. Passive skills are equivalent to the old Pathfinder version of 'taking a ten', but they are always available without player interaction. They give the GM a wonderful new way for judging things without rolls. For example, perception is one of those things we used to have the players roll for over and over again. With passive perception we just use the passive value and only ask for dice to be rolled when a player indicates that their character is actively using perception. Walk through a dungeon, check passive perception when traps are encountered, and roll when characters are "looking for traps" or "searching a room". It is wonderful.
Now let's lump in all the other tricks for rolling less. Unless there is a significant (i.e. 5 to 10) different in initiative modifiers for foes, only roll one initiatives for foes. In addition, only roll initiative once per encounter. In addition, allow PCs, their animal companions, and other related animals to act all on the same initiative. To speed things up, always roll attack and damage rolls together.
Now taken altogether, all these rules of rolling can significantly cut down on the number of rolls to be made and adjudicated, resulting in more time for focusing on roleplay and plot. Focusing on the storytelling will make you a better GM and make your players happier, and isn't that what all GMs want?
This article is really disjointed. You start off by speaking of the gain of rolling less often then jump mostly regarding D&D mechanics. There are already many games the facilitate and encourage this within the mechanics.
ReplyDeleteI understand what you are reaching for however, the article would benefit more from sticking to advice for D&D since it missed the bigger picture. This ISN'T a GM issue it a system mechanic one.
Don't get me wrong I'm not slamming you (even though it may be blunt) I want this blog to succeed. It just needs more focus.
Your comments that this article is disjointed and lacking focus have no supporting evidence in your comment. In fact, these comments appear to be a thinly veiled attempt to cloak your disagreement with my opinion as an attack on the writing style of my blog.
DeleteI have purposely targeted my generic article with examples of the system used in over 70% of games played, indicating a focus on the expected audience. Supporting my statement that rolling less can be better, I give mathematical examples of where it can cause problems, specific principles that can assist with rolling less, and practical examples of where it can be used. Although the text is not as polished as it could be, the argument and supporting text are coherent, structured, and relevant to the majority of readers who play D&D and D&D derivatives.
Perhaps if you wish to have meaningful dialogue, you should state your opinion and support it with structured facts, or else you may continue to come off as an unfocused and disjointed commentor.