discussion Rolling Systems in RP

[Icywebs]

Hello!!

 

I was hoping to reach out to the community at large to discuss resolution to tasks/combat. More specifically, I was seeking different perspectives on what has and has not worked, and what has and has not proven to be more fun in the grand scheme of things. 

 

I don't, personally, want to deal with complex character sheets/point buy because if I wanted to do tabletop RP, I would do tabletop RP. However, I also recognize the merit in having a system to assist when you have two people who want different things in an interaction and it would come down to some form of roll off. 

 

I know that flat rolls can be employed in this, but it can also be frustrating for someone who, ICly, specializes in this field getting a 50/50 chance against someone who's kind of a novice. 

 

What methods do you employ? What have you enjoyed historically and what systems have you seen that have and haven't worked for you and why?

[Kerrath]

the upside of the rolling system is that the person receiving damage has complete control over how they receive damage, how much damage they received, and why they were hit. 

 

maybe you got hit by a fault of your own, for example. maybe they were just having a bad day. maybe you got hit but it only managed to dent/scratch your armor. or maybe it's time to go all out and describe in excruciating detail the extreme level of waterworks going on as your blood gushes everywhere.

 

generally speaking though i usually see all people who consider their characters to be 'fighters' as being roughly comparable. i don't mind being hit by someone whose character is a professional or amateur fighter at all.

 

this of course depends on mutual respect with the people you're RPing with.

[Teadrinker]

I have and have seen a lot of groups create their own roll systems that suit their needs.

 

It also depends on how many people are going to be using it because roll systems can take a lot of time on their own and then you always end up with that one person who won't pre-write their posts and makes everyone wait 10 minutes while they emote. :dodgy: So you don't want to weigh it down with too many details.

 

I found the greatest success was just making attacks deal X damage to boss and they devise how the attack would be emoted/performed in ways that make sense for their character so everyone is happy. Add some kind of "Limit Break" baton that can get passed around and you're generally good.

 

Devising your own personal system to suit your needs at the time is what I've found the most success with. As far as one on one sparring I just let people figure that out between each other. If two people can't OOCly figure out how it's "fair" enough for their characters to fisticuff ICly then they probably just...shouldn't.

[Arashin Kujqai]

I'm usually just generous about rolling and try not to treat it with too much tediousness. If we're sparring or something, I'll describe an attack and roll to give them the opportunity to dodge, counter attack, or whatever they want and they typically vice versa. As far as like actions in public, I feel like sometimes people have too many steps and I don't want to take all that time for just one action. Like if I was to try and hypnotize someone with a sleep spell... Supposedly you could roll against them to check perception if you're being noticed by anyone in public(so everyone around you RP'ing I guess can roll against that), then a roll to cast the spell, then they roll to see if they can wake up, and then roll to- it just keeps going to where it feels like too much for just one turn of actions.

 

I kinda simplified it a bit to 1-2 rolls, typically one. So I sneak out a wand out of my coat and roll to cast sleep on someone to put them asleep for a minute IRL time or maybe just for 2-3 /em's). Then of course I'd apply game mechanic logic, like if I tried again and put them to sleep, a status effect has less effect on a target who was just inflicted... so I'd reduce it to like 30 seconds or 1-2 turns instead. I try to be reasonable and not too tedious about it, obvious this all includes if I even won the roll and successfully cast it on them. I digress though....

 

 

As for situations where it's like a master against a novice, I usually tend to treat it lightly. Like if the novice wins something against a master, and assuming I'm the novice, I just say it was "somewhat" successful in my own wording. Like for example me being a novice swordsman vs a master trying to cut a log perfectly in half like he is in a contest. Let's say we roll to determine who's log is cut better/faster/etc who wins and who doesn't cut it. I roll lower than him, he obviously cuts it in half np and I fail to... Say I won and he doesn't, I could just get halfway through the log successfully but get the blade a lil stuck while they can write however they want. I usually apply some logic to ideas like that reasonably.

 

 

tl;dr: I don't follow a particular system or setup, I typically roll the dice like rock paper scissors with someone and we feel it out reasonably and generously. If it's something god-mode worthy or too much, I include more dice rolls depending on what it is. I've always been a believer that RP is about communication to have fun rather than power trips or statistic ruling to create it. We're all human, just have a good time .

[Verad]

I spend a great deal of time working on dice systems. I made a linkshell for it, converted the FATE tabletop system for use in-game (read: converted a 300-page document to something a sixth its size and added some notes on incorporating Jobs), and am tinkering with converting another system that will be more effective at using /random in-game to eliminate the need for an outside roller.

 

I'm basically fine with character sheets because I want the complexity and interesting results that come from more detailed RPG systems while also getting the better writing and prose styles of freeform players.

 

What I want from dice specifically are the same thing that OP has described - accurate assessments of character ability in resolving conflict. But what I also want is the capacity for dramatic upsets, which is where most people seem to stumble at the 'Why should a novice have a fair chance against an expert" conundrum. I agree they shouldn't have a fair chance, but if they don't have some chance at all of success, even as slim as 1%, then I don't see a point in rolling.

 

FATE did a decent job at this by relying on a swingy roll system and by including a metamechanic that allowed characters to be more effective at a roll if it was important to their personal story development or plot hooks or what-have-you. What I'm working on now includes flat bonuses for characters over a certain level of ability when competing against characters below that.

 

I'm also looking for mechanical means of resolving conflicts that lead to interesting decisions beyond "Roll, describe how the conflict ends.' That means thinking about levels of success and failure and restricting the ability of players to use the same ability indefinitely. 

 

As far as making character sheets, I look for systems that allow for a lot of flexibility in defining what your character can do. This is partly because very few roleplayers adhere strictly to the Class/Job system in the game such that it could be converted to a class system, and partly because most players aren't making a character for the system but rather converting an already-existing character to it, and freeform characters have been, in my experience, pretty broad. Can't begin to recall the number of times I've walked players through the issue of "I can't seem to include all the stuff I think is important about this character on this sheet" when working with Fate-14.

 

The real problem with dice systems I've found are character advancement, especially when new players start using the system after many players have used it long-term. Many old dice guilds on AOL had the problem of a hierarchy forming from more "experienced" characters lording it over weaker ones, and so I try to avoid that when thinking about how to describe character advancement. So far, the ability to rewrite character stats at a slow pace over time has shown some success, but I think more can be done there.

 

Ultimately, I look for systems that marry the best traits of tabetop roleplay with the more freeform desires of the playerbase, balancing the desire for interesting mechanics with the interests of players who just want to get on with it already. There's an actual Final Fantasy RPG system or two floating around the internet, but I wouldn't think of using them online because they're both too rules-heavy.

[Kismet]

I hate dice systems and character sheets.

 

Why? Simply put... it's a combo of being lazy and finding them really boring.

 

I don't want to contribute the time and attention one must dedicate to those sorts of things. I feel it rips me out of the narrative, creating this annoying bug I have to constantly shoo away as I'm already busy juggling character development and whatever else I'm writing. Sure, they can create a sense of order and fairness. And sure, they're only as limiting as your writing allows them to be (to a certain extent). But it's just not something I find that a care for at all.

 

Like the OP said, if I expressly wanted tabletop elements, I'd find a tabletop game to play. Not saying that's what I expect others to do, those are just my preferences.

[Verad]

I hate dice systems and character sheets.

 

Why? Simply put... it's a combo of being lazy and finding them really boring.

 

I don't want to contribute the time and attention one must dedicate to those sorts of things. I feel it rips me out of the narrative, creating this annoying bug I have to constantly shoo away as I'm already busy juggling character development and whatever else I'm writing. Sure, they can create a sense of order and fairness. And sure, they're only as limiting as your writing allows them to be (to a certain extent). But it's just not something I find that a care for at all.

 

Like the OP said, if I expressly wanted tabletop elements, I'd find a tabletop game to play. Not saying that's what I expect others to do, those are just my preferences.

 

Tabletop RPers say exactly the same thing and have the same problem. Everyone wants rules that "get out of the way" in some form or another.

[Erah'sae]

I hate dice systems and character sheets.

...

Tabletop RPers say exactly the same thing and have the same problem. Everyone wants rules that "get out of the way" in some form or another.

 

There was a table top system I played some years ago called Primetime Adventures that was more focused on collaborative storytelling in an episodic fashion as opposed to a 'combat system'.  It might be a bit more of what you're looking for Kismet?

 

If I have the time I'll try and hunt down my copy of the book.  They do have a PDF for sale relatively cheaply though.

[Warren Castille]

Dice systems are a blessing and a curse.

 

They provide insulation again the stereotypical powergamer that everyone's got stories about: The numbers are plain on who wins whichever exchange or action, and reneging on those make you look like a chump. The trouble with that, as mentioned, is that that's only reliable if the exchange is already able to go in one direction or the other. A trained soldier who served in the 1000 Year War and then across the Wall losing to a 14 year old kid with a knife? Yeah... Entirely possible in a /random system.

 

There are ways around that, kind of. One of the systems I was curious as to play with was where you play the numbers game with your results: /random, and then add those numbers together until you get a single digit number. So if someone rolls a 127, and someone else rolls a 932? 1+2+7= 9 versus 9+3+2=14, 1+4=5. 127 beats 932 when using arbitrary rules to reduce numbers to one digit. It helps level out the randomness while throwing an entirely new curve to the randomness. Mostly, it would exist to make low number rolls not be so poorly received.

 

I think it comes down to trust. The more I trust someone to cooperate to tell a story with me, the less concerned I am about using dice to keep things "fair." Freeform RP is preferable but not everyone wants to ever give up a single attack or exchange. There's no catch-all system for this kind of thing, you should really just communicate with your RP partners to discover a middle ground of what works for everyone.

[Kismet]

I hate dice systems and character sheets.

...

Tabletop RPers say exactly the same thing and have the same problem. Everyone wants rules that "get out of the way" in some form or another.

 

There was a table top system I played some years ago called Primetime Adventures that was more focused on collaborative storytelling in an episodic fashion as opposed to a 'combat system'.  It might be a bit more of what you're looking for Kismet?

 

If I have the time I'll try and hunt down my copy of the book.  They do have a PDF for sale relatively cheaply though.

 

Thanks for the suggestion! I'll definitely take a look at that when I have time. In the past, some tabletop lovers have pointed me towards a couple of alternative systems that were potentially interesting, even if they weren't something I could apply to my personal RP circles at the time.

 

While I may not be the biggest fan of this stuff, I'm not opposed to the idea of throwing things at a wall every once in a while just to see what sticks.

[Michikyou]

Not to speak poorly of FATE, but it seemed a little clunky for my to use, a little too long set up when yu wanted to do a on the fly scene with people who just showed up.

 

In my FC, we have our own independent system where /random rolls either get a positive bonus or a negative bonus depending on a few stats.

 

POWER

DEFENCE

HEALTH

LORE

MAGIC

CHARISMA

 

Every person is assigned 2 strong stats, 1 weak stat and the rest are +0. Strong is +200, and Weak is -200.

 

Makes you feel as if you have an advantage as oppose to just base rolls and offers less 'dumb luck'. We also have a simple class system too, but I wont go into that.

 

tldr, We use rolls too, but, not complicated versions of them.

[Kilieit]

I've played a few, but I've yet to find one I "click with".

 

My preference is for full narrative fights. In one-on-one or small group RP (I'd say about 95% of my combat RP is like this), I feel like by the time you get to the stage of asking/allowing people to make their own character sheets, you probably trust them enough to make the jump to full narrative anyway. I like to think that, in such situations, I give my character a fair win/loss ratio without me having to struggle for hours to fit him into the constraints of a character sheet. I certainly feel that the other people I RP with in those situations give their characters fair abilities in each of those ways. Another concern I've heard is that full narrative PvP will take forever - but again, when the two parties know and trust each other, I find it actually resolves quicker than Grindstone rules bouts do.

 

For me, the place where roll systems come in handy is in larger groups such as medium or large roleplay free companies, or in pick-up-and-play groups where you're essentially roleplaying with strangers to start with.

 

With full narrative, the owness is on everyone in the group to get to know each other well enough to have a good feeling for where their character's strength is in various areas compared to the others', and to trust one another not to go overboard in a given situation; to give others a chance to participate. In a group like a medium or large RP FC, that's impractical to do for every single member all of the time, and unforgiving of people who need to take an absence. It's actually more inclusive to place the owness on every individual to spend 30 - 90 minutes making a character sheet, once, and then be good to go for most of the scenarios they'll be faced with in that group. The same with pick-up-and-play groups - it's impossible to know if that random stranger you're starting off the scenario with is going to be weird about their character not being omnipotent or not, so it's safer for everyone to agree beforehand on an objective system to determine what's acceptable. If they have a problem because the system won't let them be omnipotent, then they're eliminated before the RP even begins, and can never cause any trouble for anyone.

 

Those are the situations I think roll systems are a useful solution in, but... I must admit, I still view them as sort of a "lesser evil" compared to potentially allowing free power-playing and god-moding. As someone who "floats" between FC's in terms of whose RP I'm participating in, I've tried a few different ones - and they've all had the same problem for me. Rather than facilitating and enhancing creativity, they've limited it - people will come up with something cool to do, and the system won't let them through one mechanism or another. Honestly, my opinion is that that's a feature of using roll systems at all, and not a solveable problem with them... because as soon as you start trying to solve it by giving the system more verisimilitude, the time required to create a sheet rockets up, to the point where hardly anyone will bother. It's just something you have to bear in mind when reviewing the pros and cons of introducing one for the given RP scenario.

 

(Fair shout-out here to the DM's I've seen who intervened when the system prevented something cool from happening, by the way. I do believe DMing is an art in its own, and that knowing when to call Rule Of Cool is a very important skill to learn when becoming one. Back again to smudging or throwing the system out when you trust the people you're playing with.)

 

I do still use raw rolls occasionally in that small-group / 1-on-1 RP I mentioned before. It's typically because I can think of two scenarios that are equally compelling - usually in different ways - that are on either side of a decision my character makes, or an action he succeeds or fails. Sometimes, I'll ask the person (singular) that I'm RPing with which one they think would be more interesting. But other times, especially if the deciding factor is technically spoilers or meta-knowledge about my character, or if I don't want to stall the flow of a group scene - I'll roll. Those rolls feel satisfying, because all of the outcomes are satisfying... but that feeling is impossible to distil into a system, I fear.

 

TL;DR: I think roll systems are a fair compromise to use when in a large group, or with strangers. I preferentially opt for full narrative outside of these situations.

[Rosekitten]

I've used several types of dice systems over the years. Though if I can get away with it I try to avoid using any of them altogether. I look at it from the point that if I cannot accept my character is not a god and take a few licks at the very least I probably shouldn't be rp'ing. 

 

The only time I like dice systems or some sort of fair play system in place is when I am unsure of my partner or whoever else is in the fight. Personally i'm all for wounds, getting beat up a bit and making the fight enjoyable to read. I'm not too fond of the amount of time some of the systems take up and pull me out of the so called rp groove..

 

Will my character lose a fight to a child? No probably not, just due to age and experience and probably size. Would she lose to a guard or even someone with a fair bit of combat training? Yeah because she's a bloody blacksmith, not some master of combat. 

 

Just my take on it but I very rarely use a roll system unless told I have to. So far I've had no complaints from any of the combat rp I have been in. *shrugs*

[Gegenji]

I find roll systems definitely help in comparison to the pure-randomness that sticking to straight /random rolls gives (or perhaps less so, since it's based off the in-game clock or something and isn't a true random system... but that's digressing). If your character is supposed to be some degree of competent at something, it can fluster you as a writer to have to explain for the eighth time you went 0-3 against a ten year old with a fishing pole or whatever.

 

They don't even need to be that complex, I just like the idea of being able to have a bit of a nudge in the positive direction if your character is supposed to be good at some skill or another. Keeping that chance for failure is good, it allows for some interesting potential interactions that may not happen if your character just flat succeeded. I even like the idea of having "complications" on success - maybe you still succeed but there's an issue, major or minor, that also comes up. It can just get... bothersome if your success and/or failure is completely up to chance and, for those that believe in such things, your luck with the dice.

 

BUT, that's not to say dice systems don't have their drawbacks as well. Not being able to "wholly represent" your character is one drawback, but there's another. Most dice systems can be gamed and/or abused - min/maxing and using other options to give your character a mechanical advantage beyond what others who aren't as proficient in the dice system could manage. So, rather than someone in straight RP written combat power-gaming, you can have someone abusing the system to do the same.

 

There's never going to be a surefire 100% perfect solution amongst all the options, I feel. And it's ultimately going to fall on who you're interacting with, and what you are all comfortable (and trust yourself and others) to be using. Or something. :blush:

[Verad]

Not to speak poorly of FATE, but it seemed a little clunky for my to use, a little too long set up when yu wanted to do a on the fly scene with people who just showed up.

 

In my FC, we have our own independent system where /random rolls either get a positive bonus or a negative bonus depending on a few stats.

 

I agree, and it's why I'm working on playtesting something different. In particular, the issue of resolving a roll can take up to 20 minutes as people go back and forth spending FP and invokes and things to get the best possible result on a roll. Part of that is explained by the written format; a roll might take five minutes at most in tabletop but because everything has to be written out, things last a fair bit longer. But a larger and unavoidable part is just how much modification can be done to a roll after it's made, but before it's resolved. 

 

To be clear, there are still mechanical things I really like about Fate, like Aspects. But the moment-to-moment rolls can be irritably long.

 

My preference is for full narrative fights. In one-on-one or small group RP (I'd say about 95% of my combat RP is like this), I feel like by the time you get to the stage of asking/allowing people to make their own character sheets, you probably trust them enough to make the jump to full narrative anyway. I like to think that, in such situations, I give my character a fair win/loss ratio without me having to struggle for hours to fit him into the constraints of a character sheet. I certainly feel that the other people I RP with in those situations give their characters fair abilities in each of those ways. Another concern I've heard is that full narrative PvP will take forever - but again, when the two parties know and trust each other, I find it actually resolves quicker than Grindstone rules bouts do.

 

My distaste for freeform conflict resolution has little to do with time - as my response above should show, even good rules systems can have time management issues. And it has little to do with god-moding, because as Chachan says, people can learn to minmax and abuse the system. I have lost count of the number of times I've had to step in because somebody was designing a Stunt that seemed more about punishing other players than modeling the character's abilities, and "whose Stunts are too powerful" is a constant topic of discussion in the Roll Eorzea LS and Discord.

 

My distaste for it stems from two major concerns: first, after years of watching freeform RP devolve into OOC argument, I find that for many players it's about a competition between each other in the form of "Who has the best unbeatable logic construct." That was the worst in the Wild West days of Ayenee and Rhydin, when everybody was immune to various things or had some obscure weakness, but it still shows itself in long strings of nested attacks where players try to maneuver each other into unescapable situations with lots of if/then statements and such, or by setting the terms of what they consider to be "good" combat such that the other player's style is inherently worse. The complaints about people using "would" in RP posts? That word's prominence comes from all those nested statements.

 

The other one is that I find freeform conflict resolution really predictable, and really boring because of it. Because of either a need for OOC resolution beforehand in the case of trusted players, or the "logic construct" problem above, it's usually pretty easy to see when a fight is going to break out, how it's going to be resolved, and what the after-effects will be. Giving up some agency to a randomizer, even one that's designed to represent accurate chances rather than fair ones, can lead to results that neither party expects.

[Kerrath]

more thoughts in each for me:

 

-character sheets are homework. i could see them being worth the time for an extended campaign, but at that rate you may as well play a dedicated pen and paper rpg.

 

-freeform is good if you trust the other person and have a general idea for how you want this to go down. if there's no plan for the fight's outcome, though, i'm not a fan.

 

-straight rolls, to me, are only a problem when there's a clear disparity in fighting prowess between the two characters. the upside is that randomness can add an element of spontaneity/unpredictability.

[Verad]

more thoughts in each for me:

 

-character sheets are homework. i could see them being worth the time for an extended campaign, but at that rate you may as well play a dedicated pen and paper rpg.

 

I mean, I am. I'm just doing it here. They're not totally separate entities.

[Sig]

Less is more when it comes to rolling systems.  Narrative and character actions should drive RP content.  When I incorporate RNG into roleplay, it is usually in a very loose, interpretive fashion (i.e. - low rolls = sucking; high rolls = amazing -- but not always).

[Edvyn]

i screwed around with a roll system which gives the ingame /random the illusion of a single d10, coupled with an action economy i stole from d&d 5e, arbitrary wound values and some modular character archetypes which i wrote to cover basically everything the average ffxiv player would come up with

 

after a little more testing, i might even let people i don't know have it

 

i'm more tilted toward the fluff end of things so i like to keep mechanics simple, but that's not all of it - the reality is that a decent amount of mmo rpers have not played and never will play a tabletop rpg. they aren't going to do the homework required to write up even a basic character sheet, and there is no way id require that sort of thing for participation in my events - to do so would bar a lot of very interesting people from entry!

 

nerds are lazy, there's also nothing wrong with this and if your system won't appeal to lazy people it's going to be less and less accessible

[ExAtomos]

I don't think anyone's mentioned this yet (but it is still early and I'm only on my first cup of coffee). I use the in game /random as a percentage system for performing certain feats like dodging that poison dart trap or noticing a hidden door. I'll scale the "difficulty" according to the character's general skill/abilities (nothing set in stone). So if the character is a skilled game hunter, I figure they'll probably be pretty good at noticing a shadow seems to be following them and will set the bar pretty low (/random 400 or higher, for example). If the character is the academic type, prone to long periods of focused study, I'd expect say, 700 or higher.

 

For combat, I go with the higher/lower thing with the numbers used as a sort of modifier. So if the character randoms an 850 to the opponent's 130, whatever they do will probably send the opponent flying/to the ground. I want the fight to progress logically. Better /randoms combined with detailed emotes (what is targeted, for example) and the character will win.

 

This system requires a lot of trust all around. The players trust me not to make things impossible for them and run things fairly and reasonably; I trust the players not to fudge their rolls or go into god mode (when running a scene, we may not all be in the same location.) I have successfully run dnd-style narrative scenes this way.

[Aegir]

I love participating in and trying out different systems~ So far there has only been...two.... I've tried out that have been so complicated that I wanted to erase myself from existence.

[Valence]

The main advantage of rolls is what makes it fun for players involved, which is surprise. People have fun because they don't know exactly what the outcome is, and even if there is a strong chance for it to be that way instead of this way, there is still the little possibility something screws everything up.

 

Rolls are by definition game elements and thus bring a more gamey feel to what they touch. It's the exact same thing that people arguing for or against full story games like Quantic Dream games or Telltales, and whether or not they are games and whatever asinine argument it is always about. It's basically just a matter of taste, and in our online case, of context. Some events will require the smallest amount of rules by necessity, and some at the contrary, a mandatory base for various reasons.

 

That being said a system I usually find acceptable and always easy to implement in most situations when people want to create differences in what characters specializations are and their respective level of power, is asking players to make me a list of their skills/abilities and rate them from 1 to 9. The higher the most potent.

 

Then it's a simple matter of roll/check. If your character rates 6 at a specific skill, if they roll under 600 they are good, above, they fail.

 

In case of opposing rolls like for combat, people roll their dices, check if they aimed correctly, and if so for example for a character with a skill of 6, they have to roll under 600 to pass. It doesn't mean the enemy is hit however. The other player will also roll their opposing skill and if only one succeeds, then they hit automatically, and if both succeed, then the one being higher than the other hits and cause damage. It means someone with a higher skill rating will always get a certain advantage over the other since they can roll way higher while still passing their ability check.

 

To take an example, the Warrior of Light having a swordsmanship skill of 9 versus a lvl1 mite having a melee skill of 1, the WoL can roll between 1 and 900 to pass, while the mite will only be able to pass between 1 and 100. Which leaves 100 to 900 for the WoL to win even if the mite passes its 1-100 check.

 

A variant can also include a dodging skill instead if you want to keep a strong difference between attacker and defender, or if you think it works best for ranged combat for example.

 

You can of course makes things more complex if you like as a GM by adding your standard bonus or malus to rolls depending on the context (a short sword vs a lance, etc).

 

I find that system overall to be pretty simple and elegant and works most of the time for rules light contexts like MMO RP.

 

 

 

Edit: you ask me, but what about a ranged fighter versus a melee fighter? Good question, and you have several ways to deal with it, for example, Melee can't attack as long as they are not in melee range and can only roll an evasion skill instead. Once they are at range, the ranged attacker will suffer malus to their rolls.

[Chompie]

In pick-up RP, I pretty much never use rolls. Rolls slow things down and.. honestly, I don't like just 'roll to see if success'. Fighting another player, it takes nothing into account, it's just a coin toss. Doing anything else in pick-up RP, it's pretty pointless. If I roll badly to find where the villain hideout is... that doesn't make our little scene more interesting. So, I tend towards freeform in pick-up RP!

 

However. In fights between players, I hate when it becomes logic-boxing, which Verad brought up earlier. It's powergaming except there's no system to game, so there's just this morass of words that says 'every approach is covered because I've thought of all of them' and that's also not fun. Luckily, this is rarely a problem for me because my character is flighty, sees no shame in running away and is very good at it. So I can end those RPs pretty easy and go do something else.

 

But.. What would drive people to try to cover everything? Why might some people frown at randomness?

 

People hate when their characters get harmed in a way they didn't plan. This is a pretty big constant across lotsa people! Sure, it's sometimes quite unreasonable and can stifle character growth... but I wouldn't jump to saying it's because everyone's a poor sport. No, this frequently has more to do with the inherent problems of a Group of people doing scenes together.

 

People naturally want to play together, but everyone writes in different genres. I'm over here writing The Adventures of Tintin, but my friend who also wants to be a part of things is writing Sin City. My end goal is that there'll be a wild tale to tell at the end, but players will generally come out just fine and ready for the next episode. My friend, let's call her Silbra, she wants things to be dark and grueling. She wants characters to overcome horrors, to amass scars from close calls, and generally have bad things that happen have a real effect on the characters!

 

Neither of us are wrong. They're both good ways to write, they're just quite different and not particularly compatible. But we're friends, and we want to RP together with all our other friends!

 

So how do we reconcile this? Rules. When it comes to big group events, it's very hard to get through them without rules of some kind! Rules like "Wait til everyone else has posted before you post again" are common. Sometimes there are disclaimers when someone's going to host one, like "Characters might be hurt in such a way/severity". And rules very easily give way to a roll system! Maybe a simple one, maybe a full tabletop system! I'll get back to that in a bit.

 

Arbitration is the biggest problem in group RP events. Someone has to run it, someone has to be the one who says what's going on, someone has to make sure it's fun for everyone and not just That One Guy.

But just.. needing to have someone arbitrating is rough.

- They run the story, but generally don't get to play their own character

- They need to know what the players' characters are good at, to properly understand how to give them fun. Which preeetty much amounts to character sheets if it's a group where you don't intimately know everyone.

- Or you could distribute information on the kinds of things foes will do, and have everyone play and narrate trials and foes at the same time! But that requires a VERY good connection and trust between everyone. Which is rare!

 

I think I've started rambling. Uuuh. Whatever point I was aiming at, I don't know.

[Sasarna Sarna]

My friend made this combat system they refer to as 'dnd lite' that's based on the /random rolling system. We've been using it for dnd ffxiv sessions for the better part of a year now ^^

You can see more about it here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mSkt4ZEufv3ZHL3Gk2EBwqa8eR6SHw7Jbz4ccsg4Pos/edit

 

There's a lot there, but that's simply because it's designed to be completely customisable.  You want to play a character that can't be hit? You want to play a glass cannon, your rolls -will- reflect that. If anyone wants to sit in on a game, hit my discord up on 'The Laladome #8597' Our current campaign is as soldiers in the Ala Mhigo rebellion.

[Verad]

Sasarna, where the hell have you been all my life.