This article is the fifth in a twelve part series that talks about the choices/decisions that need to be made when designing a role-playing game system. This time I talk about mechanics for narrative modification of dice rolls (both before and after the roll) and exerting direct control over events. At it’s most basic we talk about methods to make dice rolls less random when it really counts so they don’t screw up the narrative. I also cover other forms of narrative fiat.
Q: Is randomly determining the outcome of events a good or bad thing?
A bit of both actually. The reason there is randomness in an RPG is so the GM doesn’t have full control of the narrative. Consider the following example: a PC attacks the wounded Duke (the Big Bad Evil Guy), misses, and then the Duke escapes through a door and locks it behind him. Now consider 2 different “game mechanics” for how this could have happened, with an eye on how the PC responds to it.
Case 1: No randomness is involved (dice-less make believe); the outcome of events is dictated by the GM. The PC is likely to ask something like “How come I missed, when Bob just hit him?” and suppose that the GM’s response is “Another hit would have killed the Duke, and I think it makes for a better story if he escapes to fight another day.” That player is going to feel like his character doesn’t matter to the story and would likely quit the game.
Case 2: The PC rolls dice for the attack and it comes up a miss. In this case the PC is probably going to be OK with it because the dice are fair and impartial, and if they had come up in his favor he would have killed the Big Bad Evil Guy.
Of these two options, rolling dice is the better way to go, especially since the dice happened to choose the outcome that was better for the story, at least this time. What if things had gone the other way and the PC ended up killing the Duke (too soon)? That could have had a very detrimental effect on the story.
S
o neither “completely dictated” nor “completely random” is a perfect solution. In some ways the “resource management” approach to attempt resolution (See Part 3 of this series) used in the TSR Marvel Universe RPG is more appropriate to resolving actions that are critical to the narrative. But for run of the mill actions, ones that aren’t critical to the story, rolling dice is fine. For example, it doesn’t really matter whether a PC kills a particular Goblin with this attack, or the next one, or the attack after that. And it doesn’t really matter if the Goblin, after seeing his friends get whacked by the rest of the party, decides that discretion is the better part of valor and runs away.
In any event, there is no such thing as “completely random” determination of events. There is a probability distribution inherent in dice rolls that affects the outcome. This distribution of dice rolls, in combination with things like character proficiency (which may be determined by character level rather than a skill system) and the circumstances surrounding the event being decided by the dice roll, stacks the odds either in favor of or against certain outcomes.
Q: Is stacking the odds in favor of the better-for-the-narrative-outcome a good way to resolve events that are story critical?
Not really. If, for example, you have the PC roll a percentile and the outcome the PC wants will only occur on “100,” then the PC is going to recognize what you’re doing and resent it. If your intent is to use narrative fiat (dictating events), you’re better off being up front about it and explicitly using narrative fiat. Honesty is the best policy. However, you definitely should also compensate the PC for using that fiat.
You could give the NPC a small boost for a terrain advantage, say for being a few steps further up a staircase than the PC they are dueling with. Any modification of the normal odds for a roll needs to be narratively justified by the circumstances in the story; getting it to turn out how you want it does not qualify as narrative justification. If you need the story to turn out a certain way, the best approach is to use a resource management type game mechanic to “pay” for the outcome that you want; but to make things fair PCs should have access to the same “pay for fiat” game mechanic. I’ll cover to these a little later; at the moment we need to discuss circumstance based modification.
Q: How do you want to implement circumstance and/or other modification of dice rolls?
Most games have some general purpose unfavorable/favorable circumstance modification rule, and the modification is usually determined before the dice are rolled. In the Wizards of the Coast Star Wars Saga Edition RPG this is a -2/+2 modifier to a d20 roll. There are also specific modifiers/mechanics for being prone, blind or deaf, immobilized (treat Dexterity Score as being 3, which means a -4 penalty), flat footed, or flanked, having cover (+5 to Reflex Defense) or better yet improved cover (+10 to Reflex Defense), having concealment, and the condition track which replaced the vast array of status conditions (like dazed) that appeared in prior d20 systems. Saga’s condition track generated much fan love and was heralded as an amazing simplifying mechanic, but there are still several different types of situational modifiers to keep track off.
I freely admit that my 3D RPG does not offer the optimal tactical experience; although it does handle land verses air tactical combat better than any other RPG that I’m aware of. I deliberately sacrificed some tactical features to speed up combat and improve the narrative experience. Cover and concealment are treated as equipment (they provide an equipment die to the Fortitude and Reflex Defense dice pools). My game also has 3 condition tracks: Physical, Mental, and Social which cap attribute dice (I’ll talk more about them in Part 8 of this series; for now I’ll say just that Mental attacks and Social attacks move you down the Mental and Social condition tracks which caps the dice that you can use for your Acuity and Charisma attributes respectively). But every other circumstance modification (e.g. being prone or being flanked, or having a terrain advantage) is treated with the generic favorable/unfavorable circumstances mechanic.
In my game there are 5 possible circumstantial modifiers: very favorable (or +2f circumstances), favorable (+1f circumstances), neutral, unfavorable (-1f circumstances), and very unfavorable (-2f circumstances); +1f circumstances means upsizing 1 die by 1 step (for example from a d10 to a d12); neutral means that no dice get upsized or downsized; +2f circumstances means either upsizing 1 die by 2 steps (for example from a d8 to a d12) or 2 dice by one step each; -1f means downsizing one die by one step (for example from a d6 to a d4); -2f means downsizing 1 die by 2 steps (for example from a d10 to a d6) or 2 dice by one step each. The GM adds up all the positive and negative circumstances affecting a roll to reach one of those 5 circumstance positions to determine the total amount of upsizing or downsizing but the person making the roll decides which die or dice to apply it to.
Q: How do you want players to be able to modify the circumstances/outcome of a roll if at all?
In most games, PCs can take actions that can result in the GM bestowing some kind of favorable circumstance bonus; this might be taking cover, or having advantageous position (a la “It’s over Anakin, I have the high ground”), or dropping a smoke grenade to gain the benefit of concealment, or teaming up with another character to flank an opponent. That’s not what I mean by this question. What I’m talking about is an “I’m going to give myself an advantage” declaration type mechanic.
I first encountered this idea in the West End Games d6 Star Wars RPG; since there weren’t many other RPGs in existence at that time, I think WEG invented it. In WEG d6 Star Wars, a PC could spend one or more character points (multipurpose experience points) to add one die per character point to the fistful of d6 dice that they rolled to resolve an action (the “revised and expanded” version of the 2nd edition of the game later limited the number of character points you could spend on a roll to 3); this could even be done AFTER the normal roll to achieve a higher result. They could also spend a Force point which was more powerful, but only one Force Point could be spent on an action.
A lot of subsequent games copied this idea (with modification). In FATE you can spend a fate points to boost a roll by 1 point (or by 2 points if you invoke an applicable “aspect” when spending the fate point). In Marvel Heroic Roleplaying you can spend a plot point to upsize or “step-up” a die before the roll (among other things). The Wizards of the Coast Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has force points and destiny points; force points are a bit like character points in WEG d6, destiny points are more comparable to force points in WEG d6 but they allow the user to straight out say “I scored a critical hit” or “that attack missed me completely” rather than simply modifying the roll. In the Fantasy Flight Games Edge of the Empire Star Wars RPG, you can spend a destiny point to upgrade an ability die (custom d8) into a proficiency die (custom d12) before the roll; or, if you don’t have any ability dice in the pool (i.e. if you only have proficiency dice), then you can spend a destiny point to add an ability die to your pool. D&D 4e has action points. I can think of several more examples off the top of my head, but I think you get the idea.
Back in 1990, I house-ruled AD&D so that my players got 1 “favor” per level, where a “favor” meant that the PC could choose to change one die to any possible roll, and they could acquire up to 3 “favors.” Spending “favors” on level-up hit point rolls was a favorite tactic among my players because it provided a permanent benefit.
The common element in all these examples is that altering the roll is paid for with a limited resource (even if it is a temporary/renewable resource that gets replenished at the beginning of each session). If you create an RPG, I highly recommend having some kind of mechanic to do this; in fact I recommend having at least 2 or maybe even 3 such mechanics. Many games have 2 versions: one weaker and the other more powerful — for example, character points and force points in WEG d6 Star Wars, or force points and Destiny points in Star Wars Saga Edition. Note that some “talents” (one of the specialization mechanics) in Star Wars Saga Edition grant the ability to reroll and keep the better or reroll and keep the second result; these can typically be used once per encounter and act like a third “resource based” mechanism to alter the roll. But the interaction between fate points and “aspects” in FATE to get a more powerful version of a roll altering mechanic is pretty cool too.
In the 3D RPG I have 3 player controlled mechanisms for modifying a dice roll and/or its outcome. The first of these is “themes”; the second is Karma; the third is the “Destiny pool”.
My “themes” are a lot like “aspects” in FATE. Themes are also a little bit like the abstract “traits” in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying, which I think have awesome narrative flavor. I give several examples of “themes” in the rules: “casanova”, “connections”, “daredevil”, “fantastically wealthy”, “gambler”, “martial artist”, “religious devotion”, “revenge”, and “wizards apprentice”, but players are encouraged to make up their own themes (subject to GM approval). Whenever a theme is narratively appropriate it grants +1f circumstances on a roll, or players can spend a character point to set their total circumstances to +2f (regardless of whatever other circumstance modifications would normally apply).
Themes can be compelled by the GM much like aspects in FATE. Basically, the GM offers the PC a bribe of 1 or 2 character points to either take -1f circumstances on the check (instead of the normal +1f) or to take a particular action. For example, the GM might encourage the PC with the revenge theme (a la “Hello my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.”) to abandon the party in dire straits in order to chase after the object of his/her revenge. The GM could also compel a PC’s “casanova” theme to have a newly introduced NPC be a spurned former lover who is holding a grudge.
If a particular action is compelled by the GM, the PC’s revenge (or other compelled) theme would still provide +1f circumstances to any applicable rolls (the PC could even spend a character point to set the circumstances to +2f). A PC can have as many themes as they want (the first is free, each additional one costs 20 character points) but they can only use one theme at a time; thus, if they let the GM compel one theme for negative circumstances on a check, they can’t use a different theme to cancel out those negative circumstances. PCs can refuse to have their themes compelled.
The Karma pool consists of 2N+2 double sided black and white chips (I recommend using Othello tokens; you could also you the Destiny point tokens from Edge of the Empire). The “2N” chips are for the “N”-number of players at the table (2 chips for each player) and the +2 chips are for the GM; however, all of the chips are mixed into a single pool that’s attached to the party as a whole; Karma is not attached to individual PCs or NPCs. The 2N player or PC Karma chips represent the relationship between PCs and the universe/supreme being. The 2 GM or NPC chips represent the Karma of all the NPCs under the control of the GM in that session. At the beginning of the campaign, half of the Karma chips are white and half are black. The Karma pool persists (is not reset) from session to session.
If a player misses a session, then 1 white and 1 black Karma chip are removed from the pool; if the Karma pool is all white then 2 white chips are removed from the pool; if the Karma pool is all black then 2 black chips are removed from the pool. When the player returns, 1 white chip and 1 black chip are added back into the pool regardless of what was removed because they missed the session. At the beginning of every session, the GM removes 1 white and 1 black chip from the pool and adds back in 1 white chip and 1 black chip (using the same rule as for missing PCs) to represent the Karma of a changing cast of NPCs. This is done even if the GM uses the same set of NPCs in consecutive sessions.
Players can spend white Karma, which turns it black, to accomplish any of the following things:
- Score a critical hit on an attack or a critical success on a skill check. If the roll represents a double action the critical hit/success applies to both actions.
- Cause an attack (or double attack) by any character to miss. Note that spending a Karma chip to cause an attack to miss TRUMPS spending one to hit.
- Turn a critical failure into an automatic failure.
- Gain an extra die roll to be used immediately (even if it’s someone else’s turn).
- Forcefully alter the narrative. A good example is the scene from the movie “The Matrix” in which Neo is fighting Agent Smith in the subway. After Neo and Agent Smith do the flying jump mid air wrestling with guns, Agent Smith says “you’re out” (of ammo) which could have been the result of the GM spending a black Karma chip. Then Neo’s player spent a white Karma chip and said “You are too.” The player can spend a white Karma chip to make the bad guy run out of ammo, have their weapon jam, etc.
- Destroy an item held by another character, for example cleaving the wand of the wicked witch in two with your sword or breaking your opponent’s sword during a duel. In other games breaking a held item is either an abusable mechanic or incredibly difficult to pull off. In my 3D RPG, it’s a rare and narrative event that can be triggered on cue at the dramatically appropriate moment.
- Miraculously survive what should be certain death, e.g. a massive explosion or falling off a cliff, and have the opposing side says “no one could have survived that” and either not look or not find the supposedly deceased character. The supposedly deceased character will wake up later, perhaps after being pulled out of the water by a fishing boat while unconscious. A character that spends a Karma chip in this matter will not drown or die by another method while unconscious or trapped.
- Magic using PCs, can also spend Karma to enchant items.
- Other PCs can spend Karma to create non magical but “Legendary” (think master craft but with narrative implications) items, which follow a similar mechanic to enchanted items.
GM’s can spend black Karma (which turns it white) to accomplish those same things. Also, to have NPCs attack the Social Defense of one or more players, for example a law suit, criminal trial, or smear campaign, the GM must spend one black Karma chip per PC under the attack.
When the PCs do something EVIL that can change 1 Karma chip from white to black (following guidelines similar to those for awarding Dark Side Points in Star Wars Saga Edition), it is still only one Karma chip per evil action even if other party members are aware of the action and don’t try to prevent it, and even if the whole party actively participates in the one evil action. Similarly, if the PCs do something truly heroic and self sacrificial they can change one Karma chip from black to white.
Whenever an NPC scores a critical hit against a PC, it changes one Karma chip from black to white. If the GM spent a black Karma chip to score the critical hit, then it’s still only one chip not two chips that turn from black to white.
I got the idea for a destiny pool of dice from the doom pool mechanic in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying. The destiny pool consists of one of each of the 5 following dice: d4, d6, d8, d10, and d12. At the beginning of the session, each PC rolls three of each die type and keeps the largest (if all PCs in the party choose to take the lowest of each die, then the party can flip one total, not per player, Karma chip from black to white. This happens after the GM removes and adds back in the NPC Karma. The GM rerolls his/her destiny pool at the beginning of each encounter.
Whenever a PC or the GM rolls a dice pool, they can swap any d4 in the dice pool with the d4 in their destiny pool, and/or swap d6 in the dice pool with the d6 in their destiny pool, etc. The idea is to swap good dice into your destiny pool when doing so hurts you the least so that you can pull out good dice when it matters most.
For example, you could “bank” maximal dice (dice showing the maximum possible result) over several rounds, and then pull out a critical hit (which costs 3 advantages/maximal-dice) on cue without spending a Karma chip. Critical hits do double the “first die” (die with the largest rolled result) and ignore damage reduction, so combining a single maximal die from the destiny pool along with a Karma chip can result in a critical hit that is just as damaging as a rolled critical hit; it would also leave you with one advantage to spend. “Advantage” is my “almost critical hit” mechanic; I mentioned it in passing in Part 3 of this series. The point is you don’t have to wait to store up a full critical hit in your destiny pool. “Banking” advantage (maximal dice) in your destiny pool when you’re able to and then withdrawing even just 1 advantage on cue can be very useful.
The Destiny pool can also be used to protect against critical failures and low rolls that would require you to reload your weapon and/or buy more ammunition for it (which can decrease the number of character points that you have to spend on ammo). In my opinion, keeping track of how many shots you have left until you need to reload isn’t worth devoting the mental effort to while at the gaming table. So in my 3D RPG, it’s done based on dice rolls. Also, as long as you have character points left to buy ammo on the spot you will always have another clip on you; retroactively, you brought enough with you. But the GM could spend a black Karma chip to make you actually run out of ammo for a particular weapon.
So now that I’ve covered my game’s 3 mechanisms for modifying either dice rolls or their outcomes, let’s revisit the earlier example of the PC’s attack missing the Duke who then escapes through a door that he locks behind him. In particular, I’m going to add 2 additional cases.
Case 3: The PC rolls dice for the attack which comes up as a hit, but the GM spends a Star Wars Saga Edition style destiny point (heroic characters get one destiny point per level) to make the attack miss. The player is going to feel better than if the GM just declared it a miss. But… the NPC Duke had however many destiny points (up to his level) as the GM says he did. Since the NPC didn’t have to survive a lot of game time to earn the destiny points, the “cost” of NPCs spending destiny points isn’t as “real” as when PCs spend them.
Case 4: The attack roll would have hit but the GM makes it miss by flipping a Karma chip from Black to White. The PC is going to feel a lot better about this than if the GM spent a Saga style destiny point because his roll just earned the party some white Karma. The distinction is that Karma is “attached” to the PCs not to the NPCs, so when the GM spends black Karma the cost/price he paid for that narrative fiat is “real.” The other important thing about Karma as a narrative fiat mechanic is that its use by the GM and PCs is mostly symmetric and therefore is equally valuable to both.
Think about these four scenarios. The outcome was the same in all of them (the PC’s attack missed and the Duke escaped) but case 2 (where the roll resulted in a miss) and case 4 (the GM spent Karma to make the attack miss) were the ones where PC felt the best about it. Why? Because these two cases were the ones in which the PC/GM had the most/least (respectively) control over the narrative. And of these two, only case 4 ensured that the GM could choose the outcome that made for the best story; although the PC didn’t get the outcome they wanted this time, they did bank a bit of narrative control (in the form of white Karma) for future use.
Q: How do you want to implement mind control in your game if at all?
img by: Matthew K. Nelson @ elfwood.com
In this context, I’m referring to both the magical variety and the intimidation/coercion kinds of mind control. First let me say that choosing to NOT implement mind control at all is a very valid and good option. There is very little that players hate more than having the GM take control of their characters. But if you are going to have it in your game, then I’d recommend implementing it like the compelling of Aspects in FATE or the compelling of Themes in my 3D RPG. Basically the GM offers the PC a bribe of character/experience/some-other-cool-narrative-effect points to let the GM make a specified up-front action and the player has the option of refusing to let his PC be mind-controlled. The PC is also granted immunity from any kind of “evil points” (Dark Side Points in Star Wars RPGs or black Karma in my 3D RPG) that this particular action would normally accrue.
When a PC attempts to use magical mind control to force a NPC to do (or not do) something within 1 round, it costs 1 character point (1 character point is the standard cost of casting a spell, or buying more ammo, or using many superpowers, etc.). The PC also needs to make a successful attack against the NPC’s mental defense. The NPC immediately uses their next turn’s die roll to takes a double action. The two actions are a mental defense check and whatever the PC commanded the NPC to do. If the PC’s first die is as larger or greater than the NPC’s first die then the NPC attempts the commanded action using the same roll. However, the PC’s first die is swapped with the NPC’s first die for the purposes of determining the success of the commanded action. If the commanded action is evil, then one Karma chip in the party’s pool changes from white to black.
If the commanded action is to look in the direction of a perceived sound (while the PC or PCs sneak past the NPC) then the NPC probably won’t realize that they were under the effect of mind control. But if the commanded action is to stab or shoot someone, they definitely will recognize it as mind control. If the command is to get incredibly angry at someone for a minor insult, the NPC probably won’t realize he was under the effect of mind control and may or may not (GM’s discretion) choose to attack that person on the spot.
Mind control (whether magical in nature or of the intimidation/coercion variety) that lasts longer than 1 round costs 1 Karma chip. The PC makes an attack against the NPC’s mental defense and the NPC makes a mental defense check to resist it. If the PC’s attack is successful then the NPC will attempt to commit the commanded action for a period of time equal to one day plus an additional number of days equal to the PC’s first die minus the NPC’s first die. If the NPC cannot complete the commanded action within that time period, then the GM decides whether the NPC will continue to attempt to complete it. For example, if the PCs are holding the NPC’s family hostage and threatening to kill them if the NPC doesn’t comply the NPC may CHOOSE to commit the commanded action even though they are no longer under “mind control.”
Play Testers Wanted
This is the fifth article in this series so by now you’ve had a chance to learn a good deal about some of my 3D RPG’s more narrative elements like themes, Karma, advantage (which I mentioned in passing, but it’s a bit like advantage in Edge of the Empire which I expect that many of you are familiar with), and the assembling of dice pools. You’ve also been able to see that my game avoids many imbalanced/abusable mechanics common to other games (like resource implementations of money) and that it’s fairly simple compared to other games (e.g. circumstances, ammunition tracking, time tracking). I haven’t fully detailed how tactical combat works yet, but given what I’ve told you about my system so far I’m hopeful that you’ll trust me when I say that it works very well and runs fast and smooth. And if you don’t trust me then I hope that you’ll take GM Dave’s word that my 3D RPG is a pretty slick system (you can listen for yourself in episode 14 and post show of episode 3 of the Order 66 podcast, Edge of the Empire reboot). So if my system sounds cool or at least interesting to you, then I encourage you to send a PM to EliasWindrider over on the d20radio.com forums to sign up as a play-tester.
Next Time
In Part 6 of this series I’ll discuss distance, range, and movement systems. Among other things, I’ll talk about how I handle air vs. ground and other long distance tactical (minis on a battle map) encounters; which (in my opinion) my 3D RPG does far better than any other RPG that I’m aware of.
You can find the first part of this series here, the second part here, the third part here, and the fourth part here.
Help Wanted
Since GM Dave announced it in episode 14 of the Order 66 Podcast (Edge of the Empire edition), I can now say that Gamer Nation Studios is the game design company that will be publishing my 3D RPG. The first book is going to feature a slightly stripped down version (e.g. no cybernetics/robots chapter) of my system for a traditional (D&D style) fantasy setting. If you have the time, inclination, and talent to be a world builder then send a PM to EliasWindrider on the d20radio.com forums. I’ve recruited one so far, but I’ll be looking for up to 2 more fluff/setting writers who would get a share of the profits.
Here’s a brief outline of this setting. It’s a primitive prison planet; you can think of it being like real world Australia which started a penal colony for Great Britain. There are wormhole gates from various technologically or techno-magically advanced worlds that periodically open and deliver newly convicted felons: Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, Orcs, Trolls, and Goblins. Each race generally (but not always) arrives at a different gate. “Wardens” (NPCs with mega technology bionics) prevent the “inmates” from escaping through the gates when they open. While the world is a bit grim, gritty, seedy and rough, good people do live there, in fact many of the inhabitants were born on this planet and they tend to be a bit more “innocent” then the first generation felons.
Amid the wilderness and wild beasts, there are bastions of “civilization.” The major cultural centers sprang up in the vicinity of one gate or another under the protection of the Wardens. The level of technology among the “inmates” is at the late medieval or early renaissance level; for example, archaic firearms like muskets and flintlock pistols exist. Although Dwarves and Goblins will sell black powder to other races, how they make it is a closely guarded secret. Elves have the greatest mastery of magic. Humans are well known as traders and make the best ships, and of course pirates and other swashbucklers are part of the setting. There is rivalry and bias between the different races, and even among the different human kingdoms, but the gate cities are neutral ground. The different races can intermarry and breed (they won’t get much if any page space in the first book but Atlanteans are the progenitors of all of the other “humanoid” races and are responsible for their common genetic makeup).
The “Karma effect” is well known and accepted as true (the evidence for it is overwhelming), but what causes it is the subject of a fierce debate among the inhabitants of the game universe. Some assert that conservation of Karma is a natural law like the conservation of mass, momentum, and energy. Others believe in an all powerful, primal, dualistic good and evil, semi-aware, mystical energy field created by all living things that binds the universe together. Still others place their faith in a supreme being who rewards the good and punishes the wicked, although different religions disagree on the exact nature of this supreme being. One of the more pragmatic religions proclaims the existence of an omnipotent “unknown god” who is unknowable by mortals, but chooses to reveal his/her just nature through the Karma effect. If you want to create a religion in the game world, go for it, but it’s not going to be the only one, and won’t be established as “true.”
Two other things I’d like help with are:
- Coming up with spells, now I don’t mean rules, I mean effects, descriptions, inspiration. Fireballs, disintegrate, etc. are obvious. I’m looking for the less obvious stuff.
- A list of mythological creatures you’d like to see in the game.
I’d like to have this first book be more or less “done” (subject to later revision based on play testing) by mid November (which will be one year since I started developing it), so time is short. If you’d prefer to publish a separate setting book using my system that’s OK too and I don’t need to be involved in it; my system is going to be released under the Open Gaming License.