I don't like using skills in games because they are generally about rolling to see what happens instead of good play. Checks are okay when it's difficult to tell if i would succeed. Is there a way to make solo play about clever play instead of randomness?
Maybe borrow the Rogues' Phase from Swords Without Master and narrate how a problem is solved? Or not, if a Stymie is rolled.
ReplyDeletedig1000holes.wordpress.com - The City of Fire & Coin
gamingwhiledriving.blogspot.com - Blood Like Roses: Session Zero has some solo play with Swords Without Master, in a Bloodborne-esque world.
ReplyDeleteMy only issue has been, it can feel like you're going easy on yourself, or not really playing a game, when this happens. I wrote through some Diceless Dungeons dungeon solo, and the characters did some clever things to escape combat or stymie their enemies and avoid getting hurt, but it started to feel as though I was writing a book, rather than playing a game where the PCs could get hurt or killed. Even moreso than my long prose actual plays of Cthulhu Dark - because then I don't know when or how the PCs will encounter horrors or go insane.
ReplyDeleteIf you come up with an impossible situation and then give yourself some time and think of a clever solution, that can be rewarding, absolutely. But it can also feel like you're only setting up the situation to be solved. Whereas when the GM does it and the players get through it somehow, it's a surprise to the GM - it's a surprise to me, and I enjoy that. So I wouldn't say what I was doing was bad or wrong, but you do lose some of the element of surprise or wonder from the unexpected.
Absolutely, solo play is a wider spectrum than first glance. While randomness is a common theme, it's not all about the skill checks. I love random images to flavor and inspire a scene, but the interpretation of those images is pure cleverness on the part of the 'GM' on how they appear in the game. I fine that dialog is where clever word play wins out over skill checks. If you use systems such as Wushu Open (which is way more than just wushu action), you actually get rewarded mechanically from bringing on the cinematic details. Also, Fate/Fate Accelerated Edition (FAE) is very easy to 'wing it' since you can create aspects on the fly to give you an advantage.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to Bloodborne, I have an Elder Scrolls 6 report as well. That one has one Rogues' Phase that includes a Stymie.
ReplyDeletegamingwhiledriving.blogspot.com - Azaril: Season 1, Episode 1, Scene 1
I'm not quite sure I understand your concerns about skill checks. For one thing, it's the presence of randomness that makes it a game rather than a writing exercise--though, of course, the line can get pretty blurry. Secondly, how would one revolve a situation through "clever play" and not still use skill checks. I can see a character attempting to, say, resolve a potential fight by trying to convince the NPC that they were secretly on their side, but that still comes down to some sort of check, either skill, attribute, oracle, or something else.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, OVERUSE of skill checks (in both Solo and Tradition games) can be detrimental as well. If a character is a competent driver, they shouldn't need to roll every time they hop behind the wheel. A knowledgeable scholar shouldn't have to roll to understand a language they are familiar with. Or whatever. Most TT systems include either mechanics (Rule of 1 in Storyteller, "take 10" in D&D/PF, etc) or advice to handwave circumstances where a roll is unnecessary at best, and counterproductive at worst.
Can you give an example where you felt constrained by using skill checks?
Depending on your style (and it is great that solo allows for so many styles), solo gaming can certainly feel like creative writing. There are even games that specifically cater to that side (Quill, English Eerie, The Beast.) You can even choose to swing as far in the other direction with Barbarian Prince, a tactical skirmish game, or a T&T adventure where there is very little role play. The nice thing about solo is that you can find your own groove and you don't have to please anyone but your self.
ReplyDeleteMy suggestion is to try a couple of systems, oracles, image generators, and journal techniques etc. Heck, Todd M. actually does a podcast for his gaming. Go play and discover what works for you. :-)
Todd Rokely A thief in a dark corner of a room that has one person reading a book in it should need no check or to roll under an attribute (possibly with a stealth modifier for a thief), not a 1 in 6 skill check. If the thief is walking, in light, directly in front of a guard keeping watch, he should be seen without a check.
ReplyDeleteno randomness = no surprise
ReplyDeleteif clever play means to find out a clever way to solve a problem instead of simply rolling a dice it's a matter of styles of playing. I take my time when I play describing what happens, what my PC wants to do, I ask if there are interesting details that add something to a scene, I imagine possible solutions to the problem at stake and then I define which skill or stat I'll test, after rolling dices the process starts again. Like in Risus I like to describe what my PC is doing in every turn of a combat or complex task instead of quickly completing every necessary dice roll.
Michael Bacon The thief example is where I pull from "Say yes or roll the dice." In d20, I would have the thief Take 10 vs. Passive Spot and just narrate the skulking. Same with your second example. Narratively, walking in the open, under full illumination, a check isn't even possible.
ReplyDeleteMichael Bacon Ok, so, yeah, those are the examples I was referring to. In both Solo and Traditional play, OVERUSE of skill checks can be extremely detrimental to play. And I've been in plenty of tradition games that stank because the GM insisted on rolling for everything. I've seen smart wizards with tons of Knowledges fail to understand simple concepts simply because they always had to roll, and sometimes the dice are just coming up low. So, yeah, in some cases you should automatically succeed, or automatically fail, and move on from there.
ReplyDeleteBut, it's an art not a science. I know some people would make the thief roll, and, in the case of a failure, come up with a justification of WHY he failed. The fellow reading the book drops the pear he was about to bite, and it rolled over right by the thief's foot--what doe the thief do? Or, later, he walks right by a guard and SOMEHOW manages to sneak by him? Well, maybe the guard is distracted by something his wife said to him that morning and is complaining to a fellow guard and just waves the thief through--after all, only authorized people are allowed in this area!
Adjust it as you need. I like keeping the element of failure in my games, but there are sometimes where OF COURSE this character defeats this foe, or sneaks past this guard, or can charm lonely princess, or what-have-you.
But, yeah, treat the game like you would a Standard one, and only call for checks when it's relevant or you think it would be interesting/fun.
By clever play, I'm guessing you mean in the sense of 'outwitting' enemies. Unless you can outwit yourself, I'd say solo play is not usually geared towards that. Maybe if it's you vs a system, or vs a pre-arranged challenge.
ReplyDeleteThe closest thing that I can think of is 'Beloved' (see links below). The basics of that game, as succinctly put by Vincent Baker, are that you are pitting present-you against past-you. You create a monster that is unbeatable, and then try to find how the monster might be beatable. There's no stats involved, it's purely conceptual.
You might be able to do something similar with a system that has some crunch, though. Set up a boss monster, make it super tough (maybe even unbeatable), and see if you can find tactics to beat it. You could do the same with a dungeon: design it to be unbeatable, and then try to beat it anyway by trying to find and exploit weaknesses in your design.
I guess is something akin to char-op, but in reverse which is a solo rpg activity. Sounds like a cool way to make killer dungeons/monsters and then selling them on DTRPG, haha.
tao-games.com - » Beloved these are our games
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forge/index.php?topic=31241.0
(A hack of it, maybe: http://www.1km1kt.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/beholden_v1_by_baxil.pdf)
Alex Yari Thanks for mentioning this idea! A two-stage game (create the challenge and then try to beat it) sounds like it could allow a solo RPG player to experience game creation and gameplay asynchronously, potentially lessening the number of things to think about at once.
ReplyDeleteThis doesn't prevent character knowledge from being equal to player knowledge either. For example, perhaps the character designed the dungeon for a client who then betrayed them, and now the character has to escape. Or maybe the character found an almanac describing a boss monster in high levels of detail.
It would be interesting to compare this two-stage game to being a GM and emulating the players.
If I find Vincen'ts post on it, I'll post it here. I see it as more of a gamist bend than emulating the players. To me, ot would feel closer to something like setting up a position on a chess board and trying to find the best move.
ReplyDelete