I've been brainstorming about a scene-level resolution mechanic for solo RP. I don't have any of the finer points of character building worked out yet, but below is my first draft of a basic resolution mechanic. Is what I wrote below generally comprehensible?
Questions, requests for clarification, and critiques also welcome.
Retreat-at-a-cost mechanic in the works.
The goal of the mechanic is to, instead of asking whether the party succeeds or fails, to determine what it would cost them to succeed, and then see if they stay the course.
I'm also trying to avoid scene resolution that has simple results that outright kill a party member. Just for example, if a party member requires 6 points of consequences to be killed, no single consequence could off a PC. Deaths would instead be a result of the player running out of hit point tracks to place consequences in, and making the hard call about which PC takes the fall to ensure the party's victory.
Draft Rules Text Below
Resolving a scene
Intro
1. Set the scene and describe the events leading up to the conflict.
2. Determine the party’s goal and general methods, and which party members are participating in the conflict.
Setup
3. Gather a d6 for each party member participating.
4. Gather additional d6s based on how difficult the plan is relative to the party’s competence. Easy = 0, Normal = 1, Hard = 2, Very Hard = 3.
5. Gather up to 3 additional d6s based on how many advantageous resources are spent (salvos of strong spells, belts of heavy ammo, grenades, taxing super powers, etc.). For each die gathered this way, grant yourself a Null to be used after the roll.
6. If you would roll more than 12 dice, only roll 12 dice. Each die beyond the 12th is considered to roll a 1.
7. Determine how dangerous the party’s plan is based on all factors described above. Low = 3, Medium = 4, High = 5, Crazy = 6.
Roll
8. Roll the dice pool and separate the dice into two piles:
(a) Dice greater than or equal to the danger number.
(b) Dice less than the danger number.
9. Null a number of dice from pool (b) by moving them to pool (a). You will want to null dice showing high numbers over ones showing low numbers.
Resolve
10. Narrate the conflict, generating one sentence for each die.
(a) Whenever you narrate a sentence using a die from pile (a), describe an action by a party member that succeeded at no cost, or a mistake made by the opposition.
(b) Whenever you narrate a sentence using a die from pile (b), describe an action by a party member that succeeded at a cost, or a success of the opposition, and then take a consequence with a value equal to the number shown.
11. Once all dice have been consumed, narrate the end of the conflict in the party’s favor. They have achieved their goal at the costs described above.
Looks like it has some interesting possibilities. My only concern, just at first glance, is that it requires you to spend your "advantageous resources" up front.
ReplyDeleteIn games with limited resources, I find that you usually want to hold them in reserve and wait to see how the encounter goes before you deploy them. Requiring players to declare it up front feels wrong to me, like invoking a Fate aspect for +2 to a die roll before you even roll the dice.
I wonder if it would be better to move step 5 and put it between steps 8 and 9.
Ken Hubbard Great feedback, thanks! So maybe step 9 becomes a "check off resources to spend and reroll that many dice from pile (b)" instead? That would actually reduce the overall dice burden and make the conflict narratives more concise...
ReplyDeleteIf step 11 is "They have achieved their goal ", then why would there need to be a "Retreat-at-a-cost mechanic in the works."?
ReplyDeleteRetreat implies failure is an actual possibility.
And I'm guessing death is mentioned because this is actually combat resolution and not just general conflict resolution (In which death might not even be a possibility depending on the situation)?
I'm trying to imagine a game in which the PCs are always successful being interesting to play and I'm having a hard time. I look at games like Forthright were taking a hard loss isn't the end of PCs but the consequences for failure linger; meaning taking risks actually matters.
Omari Brooks Thanks. That does need clarifying.
ReplyDeleteIf all party members receive enough points of consequences to be killed (and that number isn't settled yet), they absolutely would both die and fail.
The retreat-at-a-cost mechanic I was thinking about was going to be a way to cut away a few of those bad rolls from pile (b) if you see your dice roll is full of consequences that you know you can't soak up. In exchange for that diminished "damage," the party gives the narrative concession that they definitely failed to stop their opponents from getting what they wanted. Their foes succeed at the ritual, drove the party from their lair, sacrificed the captives, whatever.
That said, I was hoping this mechanic could be used as scene-based resolution for everything, not just combat. For that though, it needs more depth like non-damage consequence tracks (like Blades in the Dark's clocks).
This sounds a bit like Blades in the Dark. The PCs always succeed, you spend resources up front, you consider how difficult and how dangerous the action is.
ReplyDeleteIf you haven't read BitD, give it a look. Might be some ideas useful for you.
Progress Clock
https://bladesinthedark.com/progress-clocks
Action Roll
https://bladesinthedark.com/action-roll
Toimu
ReplyDelete"This sounds a bit like Blades in the Dark. The PCs always succeed, "
What version of Blades did you read? Because PCs DO NOT always succeed, not by a long shot...
Omari Brooks unless the Effect is no effect when the PC rolls, the PC succeeds in making progress on the Clock. Just the wording John Harper uses in the games he hosts.
ReplyDeleteToimu
ReplyDeleteI’ve watched the entirety of Roll Play Blades, in which John Harper is the GM (as well as having read through the entire rule book): when there is a progress clock (and there isn’t always a clock present...) and PCs fail their action roll, they do not add ticks to the clock, period. They don’t succeed or make progress.
Are you perhaps confusing any of the following?:
- The nature of danger clocks, which only fill up when PCs roll less than a 6 ( because the PCs don’t actually want the danger to come to pass)
- downtime actions of which several of those specifically clocks still fill when a 1-3 is rolled
- or fortune rolls which aren’t used for task resolution
Omari Brooks
ReplyDeletebladesinthedark.com - Effect | Blades in the Dark RPG
Toimu
ReplyDeletebladesinthedark.com - Action Roll | Blades in the Dark RPG :
"On a 1-3, it’s up to the GM to decide if the PC’s action has any effect or not, or if it even happens at all. Usually, the action just fails completely,"
So having "zero effect" in which you can use the mechanics of the game to get to "limited effect" and is information you should have BEFORE you roll dice is way different than "nothing happened at all" AFTER a roll.
The effect level is a promise not a contract. So a GM is saying "Here is the effect level IF you roll 4, 5, or 6 on the dice..."
pg. 196:
"Zoom the action in and out. We resolve uncertain and challenging situations with the roll of the dice. But what should the scope of these rolls be? Do we resolve the whole fight in one roll, or do we zoom in to each exchange of blows? By design, the game is fairly flexible on this point. Sometimes you’ll want to resolve a lot of action with one roll and sometimes you’ll want to get down to very small moments of action."
Clocks aren't always used or necessary...
Just remembered this isn't in the BitD G+ group and I've hijacked someone's post.
ReplyDelete