I always felt the point, in most games, was to simulate realistic fiction. The difference might be subtle, but it is a difference.
Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.) -
- Thread starter Surtur
- Start date
-
Sister services, email, and search will continue to be negatively effected by the attacks. I made a thread to talk about it, if you're into networking.
If that were the case high-fantasy and comedy RPGs wouldn't have skill checks. And skill checks in general are often very unrealistic in their mechanics.
The purpose of a skill check is to add variance, drama/comedy or arbitration to an action, conflict, or situation. But it has to be relevant to what's going on and what the GM wants to do. If you're dueling with swords on a circular staircase, realistically there's a large chance you might slip and lose your footing. But if the GM doesn't care for that outcome or doesn't feel like accounting for it, it's completely ignored. The GM could be asking for all the combatants on that staircase to roll Athletics every turn to keep from falling and tumbling down the stairs. But if that's not the scene/encounter the GM wanted to do, then that's that.
Skill checks are tools for the GM, nothing less, nothing more. And they can be tweaked and used in different ways just like any other tool. For example, in a D&D campaign a few years ago our group of mid-level adventurers had aquired some lands and a manor as a reward from our efforts. One of the local lords came visiting, and since we wanted the guy's favor (since our lands had been carved from his domain) our characters decided to throw a feast in his honor. The bard, who fancied herself a cook, volunteered to roll for it. Normally, this would be a single skill check for cooking a big meal. But since it was so relevant to what we were doing, and a lot was a stake, the GM decided it would be done over five DC 15 skill checks, each 1 hour apart (with the characters setting up the rest of the feast along the way). Every check the bard made added 1 to the final outcome, and every result of 5 above/below the target added/removed 1 point. We needed 5 points to blow the guy's mind. (Incidentally, we made it with 6 points.)
Like, none of this is realistic. It's a severe abstraction of how cooking works. Believe me, the GM knew. He's a very good cook. But he structured that challenge like that because he wanted something that was relatively quick to resolve, but also added fun and drama to the situation. Realistic fiction be damned, we filled the gaps ourselves talking in-character between the rolls.
Last edited:
It's amazing how a simple reductio ad absurdum that I wrote just to illustrate how the skill rolls in PbtA are kind of bullshit given the low odds of succeeding without problems that likely need to be fixed with more rolls leading to more problems is being taken as an argument on bad DMs who do that behavior.
Like, yeah, forced rolls on simple shit is stupid. So's succeeding and causing complications in the process that need to be fixed via more skill rolls that also have a high chance of failing or causing extra problems.
It's amusing to witness people actually treating the sandwich bit as serious.
Like, yeah, forced rolls on simple shit is stupid. So's succeeding and causing complications in the process that need to be fixed via more skill rolls that also have a high chance of failing or causing extra problems.
It's amusing to witness people actually treating the sandwich bit as serious.
The upside to cards as an RNG is that each draw between shuffles increases the odds of something happening that hasn't happened yet; it provides finite bounds - you've got 52 cards, so if the cards aren't shuffled you know you'll get the ace of spades in no more than 52 attempts.
This is also the downside.
I'm currently running a game that uses card draws for wilderness exploration. The party will eventually find the things they are looking for in the wasteland, but how long it takes comes down to skill & prep (where I have a base deck built on how remote and dangerous an area, and then that deck gets cards added/removed based on party abilities and Prep like talking to NPCs and having supplies) with luck. It lets you do fun things like give players warning before a wandering monster approaches if they have the Ranger leading, so they might be able to avoid the danger.
I'm still in the "is this a viable mechanic" phase (so far, signs point to yes) but I'd like do get this to a more scientific and repeatable stage. To cut off that one guy, the base deck about 15-20 cards.
Ok, roll 2d6 to come with an example. You got a 7. So you come with a good example about making a sandwich, but you trigger a 4-page derail about GM practices and if your car should explode on the way to work or not.
This is also the downside.
I'm currently running a game that uses card draws for wilderness exploration. The party will eventually find the things they are looking for in the wasteland, but how long it takes comes down to skill & prep (where I have a base deck built on how remote and dangerous an area, and then that deck gets cards added/removed based on party abilities and Prep like talking to NPCs and having supplies) with luck. It lets you do fun things like give players warning before a wandering monster approaches if they have the Ranger leading, so they might be able to avoid the danger.
I'm still in the "is this a viable mechanic" phase (so far, signs point to yes) but I'd like do get this to a more scientific and repeatable stage. To cut off that one guy, the base deck about 15-20 cards.
Ok, roll 2d6 to come with an example. You got a 7. So you come with a good example about making a sandwich, but you trigger a 4-page derail about GM practices and if your car should explode on the way to work or not.
Last edited:
- Highlight
- #6,005
You know, all this shit is why 3E and PF have the take 10/take 20 mechanic.
5e also has a rule on it. It's on the DMG, page 237, under Multiple Ability Checks.
In short, the character can spend ten times the normal amount of time needed to complete a task, and automatically succeed at it. The caveat is that it must be a task that can be repeated. So if you're trying to climb a DC 15 wall and you have a total +5 in Athletics, you can either climb that wall in one turn by rolling 10+, or you can take 10 turns to climb it and do it without rolling. And it also doesn't work on tasks that are effectively impossible (you can't pick a magical unpickable lock), or tasks that become more difficult with failure (for example, trying to lie to someone).
You can either make a sandwich in 1 minute (10 turns) and always succeed at it, or you can attempt to roll to make a sandwich in 1 turn
Well, I dunno about that last bit. But a failure might result in your lunchmeat and cheese getting launched across the kitchen and being devoured by your dog
Who could have guessed that this thread would have a higher risk of autistic replies?
Fictional Character
kiwifarms.net
I took another look at Monsterhearts as a way to do PbTA rolls right and it's actually a really simple solution. First, all the moves are essentially opposed actions (the Lash Out Physically move essentially compresses an entire fight into one roll), so it makes sense to only succeed partially and also you don't need to roll on things where there's no opposition. So unless you're trying to kill or seduce someone with the sandwich you're making, you make the sandwich no problem. (And the problem isn't driving a car without crashing, it's talking your dad into letting you borrow the car.)
Second, the consequences for partial success usually have defined mechanical effects, so it's very hard for the GM to make your dick explode or generally screw your over without your consent. The partial exception to it is the Lash Out move in Monsterhearts 2:
This is how lashing out works in the original:
Not only do you have more options when rolling 10+, getting harmed back when rolling 7-9 is a lot more relevant as a consequence than letting the GM describe what damage you do. (And since Darkest Self lets you be a dick as much as you want, it's sometimes the desirable outcome.)
Not to mention that forcing someone to Hold Steady gives that particular move some relevance, since it's otherwise something you'd never roll willingly.
Same goes for the Turn Someone On move (one of the few where the target chooses the consequence of partial success):
The "I get embarrassed and awkward" option is just weak and bad. It gives an easy out of an uncomfortable situation. The 'They promise something' option might seem the same, but the Fae skin exists and they get bonuses to rolling against people who broke their promise to them (and they have a move that gives them +3 (!) to rolls for Turning Someone On). I also appreciate that full success in the original is just you getting a String. You Turn Someone On in the game, not because you actually want to fuck them, but to prove your superiority.
Sorry to sperg so much about Monsterhearts, but it's the only PbTA game I played extensively. Though I won't play it again, since I played pretty much everything I want in it. Which I guess is another weakness of PbTA: even if it's a good game, there's only so much you can or want to do with it. Even if Thirsty Sword Lesbians was a good game, how many games about that exact scenario you want to play? It's easier to just make a female paladin with a sword in DnD and say that she's a lesbian.
Second, the consequences for partial success usually have defined mechanical effects, so it's very hard for the GM to make your dick explode or generally screw your over without your consent. The partial exception to it is the Lash Out move in Monsterhearts 2:
So you can potentially make someone else's dick explode. The basic moves are a pretty good example of how Monsterhearts 2 is defanged compared to the original version too.
This is how lashing out works in the original:
Not only do you have more options when rolling 10+, getting harmed back when rolling 7-9 is a lot more relevant as a consequence than letting the GM describe what damage you do. (And since Darkest Self lets you be a dick as much as you want, it's sometimes the desirable outcome.)
Not to mention that forcing someone to Hold Steady gives that particular move some relevance, since it's otherwise something you'd never roll willingly.
Same goes for the Turn Someone On move (one of the few where the target chooses the consequence of partial success):
The asexuality rules already break the game pretty bad. Turn Someone On works like Shut Someone Down on asexuals. In essence, it lets you use your Hot stat for a move that normally requires the Cold stat. It would be a decent rule patch, but the ability to roll a move with your strong stat instead of a stat you're mediocre in is extremely good in PbTA. (See the post on how much effect +1 can have on your chances of success.) Plus, probably the most famous line in the Monsterhearts v1 rulebook is 'We can't choose that for our characters.' in reference to getting turned on involuntarily by people we might not find attractive.
The "I get embarrassed and awkward" option is just weak and bad. It gives an easy out of an uncomfortable situation. The 'They promise something' option might seem the same, but the Fae skin exists and they get bonuses to rolling against people who broke their promise to them (and they have a move that gives them +3 (!) to rolls for Turning Someone On). I also appreciate that full success in the original is just you getting a String. You Turn Someone On in the game, not because you actually want to fuck them, but to prove your superiority.
Sorry to sperg so much about Monsterhearts, but it's the only PbTA game I played extensively. Though I won't play it again, since I played pretty much everything I want in it. Which I guess is another weakness of PbTA: even if it's a good game, there's only so much you can or want to do with it. Even if Thirsty Sword Lesbians was a good game, how many games about that exact scenario you want to play? It's easier to just make a female paladin with a sword in DnD and say that she's a lesbian.
Man, I unironically loved 4e. And I vow to go back to it some day.
what else is there to talk about? and everybody knows pnp rpg's are serious business.
I like 4e too. its got a lot of warts, but I like what it tries to do and I really like the way it lays out player attacks and the modules do the monster stat blocks. I was able to get a library of source books due to Borders going belly up. I just wish Wizards hadn't been a bunch of cashgrabbing fuckwads and had released an actual SRD; its easy to get someone to try-before-you-buy for PF, 3.5 or 5 because you can give them to a webpage.
Sure there are *cough*Legally Downloadable PDFs, but its not the same as a quick hypertext reference for trying to get someone into a game.
Don't kink shame.
Last edited:
The quickest way to someone's heart is through their stomach, you know. So you might need to roll afterwards for damage on your sneak attack.
Zaryiu2
kiwifarms.net
I'm going to make a megathread for Chris A Fields rpg because holy shit we need it, i just started reading a review of Otherverse: America and it's a goldmine of cringe and wtfery
I mean this is what chapter 1 in the book starts with
So yeah the the game starts in 2107, decades after THE ABORTION WAR (no joke) and the more i read the more i don't know anymore if this or Black Tokyo is worse
I mean this is what chapter 1 in the book starts with
2078.
San Francisco, CA.
Choicer Territory.
Blood.
A single, thin rivulet of blood curls along the surface of the warm, clear water. The candle flames dancing on either side of the long, shallow birthing pool are reflected in that same water. And reflected in the blood as well, dancing crimson and gold on a deeper, earthier red.
Blood. Birth is always bloody.
A woman half lays, half squats in the birthing pool, her caramel skin purpling with effort as she pushes out her child. The woman is nude except for the ochre and crimson wishing-runes painted across her smooth, distended belly and down the long sloping curve of her mother-breasts Bone-white anesthetic neural taps are glued to her temples and the base of her spine.
And there is gentle applause from the audience as the lights come all the way up, and the skylight above them all irises open, allowing silvery moonlight into the birthing chamber.
Twenty two years ago, May Feneris had been conceived at the Beltane fires, and so, finally had her daughter. Cassie had no father. Cassie had a dozen fathers.
San Francisco, CA.
Choicer Territory.
Blood.
A single, thin rivulet of blood curls along the surface of the warm, clear water. The candle flames dancing on either side of the long, shallow birthing pool are reflected in that same water. And reflected in the blood as well, dancing crimson and gold on a deeper, earthier red.
Blood. Birth is always bloody.
A woman half lays, half squats in the birthing pool, her caramel skin purpling with effort as she pushes out her child. The woman is nude except for the ochre and crimson wishing-runes painted across her smooth, distended belly and down the long sloping curve of her mother-breasts Bone-white anesthetic neural taps are glued to her temples and the base of her spine.
And there is gentle applause from the audience as the lights come all the way up, and the skylight above them all irises open, allowing silvery moonlight into the birthing chamber.
Twenty two years ago, May Feneris had been conceived at the Beltane fires, and so, finally had her daughter. Cassie had no father. Cassie had a dozen fathers.
Jesus Christ. And here I was just talking in the Crackwatch thread about my ambivalence to piracy, and suddenly I see something I don't even want to fucking pirate because I don't want this shit on my computer.
Zaryiu2
kiwifarms.net
Oh it gets so, so much worse
On a scale of 1 to FATAL, how much worse are we talking about here? Because that quote there is definitely not giving me the warm fuzzies already.
Zaryiu2
kiwifarms.net
It break that scale hands down, it might actually be worse that Black Tokyo (still to be determined)
Jesus H Monkeyballs, this already reads like a bad fetish fic.
