| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1bawylieMay 14, 2015 8:39:10 | Our duties as DMs & Players are outlined in the basic rules. 1.) The DM describes the environment. 2.) The Players describe what they want to do - I ask for their goals and for how they go about achieving those goals. 3.) The DM narrates the results of the Adventurer's actions. |
| #2ZortchMay 14, 2015 9:26:14 | << DM Decision Point: Here the DM must decide if Lack-Toes can make it to Rosemary before the shark gets to her, fails to make it there in time, or if the outcome is uncertain. >> Lack-Toes fails his Athletics check!
1.) Causal (Failure to Execute Properly): Lack-Toes swims with all his might and manages to grasp hold of Rosemary's wrist but only as the shark takes Rosemary's pack in it's jaws and drags them both beneath the waves. |
| #3bawylieMay 14, 2015 9:33:43 | Yes I like the Causal one there too. I think I'd give Lack Toes' player an option: "you've grabbed her wrist but the shark is pulling her beneath the waves. You can let go and stay above water, or hold on and go below with her - what do you do?" |
| #4Rya.ReisenderMay 14, 2015 11:46:55 | Normal failure: "PC swings his axe at Goblin A, but the goblin manages to dodge." "PC shoots an arrow at Goblin A, but the goblin blocks the attack with is shield."
Critical/bad failure: "PC swings his axe at Goblin A, the goblin manages to dodge and the axe hits the ground instead and get slightly stuck in it." "PC shoots an arrow in the general direction of Goblin A, but it flies past it and gets stuck in a tree."
I also often combine different turns: "PC A swings his axe at Goblin A, but because of PC B's recent frost spell, the ground is slippery. PC A's feet slightly slip away, causing him to miss Goblin A." "PC A aims at Goblin A. Right before he shoots he hears PC B shouting. Because of this he kind of loses concentration and misses Goblin A."
There are also tables for this published by WotC, see here: http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/randomness-clever-dm%E2%80%99s-helper |
| #5pukunuiMay 14, 2015 13:24:02 | My problem is that it's difficult to come up with this stuff on the fly, especially when I've got a whole lot of other stuff to keep track of during a session.
I also sometimes feel too impatient to spend time embellishing things. |
| #6iserithMay 14, 2015 13:42:07 | I may write up another guide on this in the near future, but here are the easy go-to's for figuring out what failure looks like:
Botched a Dexterity (Thieves' Tools) check to disable a trap? Escalate the situation - it begins to set off, now what?
Failed a Wisdom (Perception) check to find a secret door? Use up resources - you find it, but it takes a lot of valuable time.
Blew a Charisma (Intimidation) check? Bring out some monsters - some more street toughs turn up to back the enemy's play.
And so on. |
| (Reply to #5)bawylie |
|
| #8EckMay 14, 2015 14:16:47 |
|
| #9pukunuiMay 14, 2015 14:26:05 | Yeah, I don't have too much trouble doing that sort of thing. It's more when my players catch me out with some action I didn't anticipate, which happens at least once a session. |
| #10ZortchMay 14, 2015 16:22:55 | What about Medicine checks to stabalize creatures with 0hp? Its an easy check, but if it is a failure are there interesting things to do?
I certainly wouldn't want to have a failure cost a death saving throw. A natural success at a cost could be stable but takes longer than the standard 1d4 to regain consciousness, but I don't really find this more fun so much as more boring.
If there are no threats about this seems to me to be a situation in which an automatic success is best. It's not so exciting to quiely fade away after the battle is over...
If time is of the essence what are some fun options?
A couple of causal options: You manage to stabalize your friend but it required some invasive techniques. Your patient suffers a level of exhaustion upon regaining consciousness. Or, if a combat situation is ongoing... You manage to stabalize your friend but it took all of your focus. Attacks against you have advantage until your next turn.
I like that with these you can save a character from potential death (even on a failed save) while still giving some penalty. But I don't find that they really move things forward in an interesting way.
Thoughts?
|
| #11pukunuiMay 14, 2015 17:02:59 | On a semi-related note, does anyone else find being able to stop someone from dying in six seconds (or fewer) without using magic a bit of a stretch? |
| #12bawylieMay 14, 2015 18:03:58 | Zortch, I think you're sort of combining the Check & Failure all in one. This is fine but let's break it down first.
Player wants to revive downed ally during combat (goal). He intends some rapid triage via the medicine skill (approach). Fictionally let's say he's going to do a tourniquet, quick and dirty, so the ally doesn't bleed out in the next 18 seconds.
We'll leave the check aside except to say it was a failure. Now, how did it fail? What actually happened.
Causal (fail to execute properly): "In your haste, you rip the cloth you're using as a tourniquet and cannot stop the bleeding."
Consequential (fail to achieve goal): "Your friend's bloody clothes obscure the full extent of their wound - you place the tourniquet too low & they're still bleeding."
Circumstantial (external interference): "You drop your pack and clear the wound, ready to treat, but as you reach for cloth for the tourniquet, your wounded ally thrashes in pain, kicking the whole medicine kit away - there's nothing you can do."
These three failures mechanically amount to "nothing happens" except one or two have costs. One costs a use of medicine kit, the other costs time to go recover it. Neither hurt the ally or proc an auto fail.
In this case, all three are better than just saying "you fail and he's still dying," and they don't advance drama or progress the game. Why not? Because in a combat situation, moments count, and having failure cost more than a moment is generally unacceptable.
Outside of combat, maybe triage fail looks very different.
Now let's looks at it from the check request. We know the player wants to stop his ally from dying by using the medicine skill to do a quick tourniquet. Following Iserith's guide, we judge that this action will not automatically succeed or fail. We know it needs a roll, from above, we can imagine what failure might look like. What does success look like? The player gave it to us - a stable ally. So we say "Alright, give me a hard Int (medicine) check. If you succeed, your ally will stabilize. But if you fail, it will probably cost you in time or materials." Then the player rolls. If he fails, (we examined that already). If he succeeds, Bueno.
I only went with failure first bc that's what this thread is about. Normally I think about it before asking for the roll but after I know the goal/approach. But you can see how failure is as much a part of adjudication as setting a DC or identifying an ability. Players should have some reasonable expectations of what success and failure reasonably look like. And then turn up the metal as appropriate. |
| (Reply to #11)bawylie |
|
| #14BadMeepleMay 15, 2015 1:58:58 |
|
| #15Rya.ReisenderMay 15, 2015 2:08:02 | Out of combat a round usually is at least 1 minute rather than 6 seconds, so you certainly could do like up to 10 medicine checks in one go. I don't make it auto-success, though. On a failed medicine check, the unstable character does a death saving throw, then comes the next medicine check. |
| #16ImaculataMay 18, 2015 3:23:14 | I'd like to expand this a bit further to a favorite topic of mine: TRAPS! Often you'll have a rogue in your party, who tries to disable a trap. And then he rolls a 1. So what happens next? There are two aspects to this. The reason for it failing, and the result of that failure. The reason is just as important as the result. So try to imagine how the trap works, and how a rogue would go about disabling that mechanism. Because this makes it far more easy to narrate the result.
For example:
The rogue is trying to disable a trap hidden at the bottom of a flight of stairs. It works with a tripwire, which releases two sharp blades that swing from slots in the wall. One blade swings towards the knees, the other towards the torso. The DM informs the rogue that he could disarm the tripwire. He could cut it, but releasing the tension could also potentially spring the trap. He could also try to dismantle the mechanism that the tripwire is attached to, which requires a check. The rogue decides to do the latter, but he rolls a 1.
1.) Causal (Failure to execute properly):
DM: The trap activates and you receive damage. (This is the most boring option) DM: Your hand accidentally brushes against the tripwire when trying to access the wall. You see the tripwire snap loose from one side. Make a reflex check to quickly jam the mechanism. DM: You try to disarm the mechanism, but as you crouch next to the tripwire your foot accidentally touches the wire, and you hear a CLICK from the wall. You dare not move your foot, for fear of triggering the trap. Maybe someone else can keep the wire where it is, so you can move your foot? DM: Your tool becomes stuck inside the mechanism. It is pretty stuck in there. You are not certain if the trap is deactivated. You could try and pull the tool free (strength check). DM: Your tool snaps inside the mechanism. This may trigger the trap. (DM makes a secret roll, 25% chance that the trap activates) DM: After some fiddling you are unsure if the trap is now disabled. You cross your fingers. (50% chance that the trap activates)
2.) Consequential (Failure to Achieve Goal):
DM: Your hand becomes stuck inside the small opening in the wall. Make a strength check to pull yourself free. DM: You reach into the wall with your tools, to try and jam the mechanism that the tripwire is attached to. But as you do so, you accidentally arm the trap. You realize that as soon as you let go of your lockpick, the trap will trigger. How will you handle this situation? (This option is far more interesting, and opens up the possibility for other party members to lend a hand) DM: You try to disarm the mechanism, but accidentally ruin it completely, and your tool in the process. It is a mess in there, but it seems to have done the job. You won't be able to retrieve your tool though. You may try and act casual in front of your party members. Keep a straight face, and they won't notice you messed up. DM: You drop your tool inside the mechanism, and it makes a loud noise as it tumbles down the gears inside. The trap is still armed. DM: As you try to disarm the trap, your hand discovers that the tripwire is connected to two traps, and not just one. You don't know where it is hidden, but you may look for it. DM: After reaching into the wall, a metal clasp seals itself around your hand, locking you in place. Then you notice that the floor beneath you is slowly starting to retract. You may perform a strength check to pull yourself free.
3.) Circumstantial (Failure Due to External Interference or Influence):
DM: You try to reach inside the wall, but the opening is simply too small. You will need to use force to widen the opening, but you fear that the shaking might set off the trap. Make a strength check to break part of the wall. (25% chance that the trap triggers) DM: There is not enough light for you to disable the trap, and you fear that you may have made things worse. You may try again with a -2 penalty, provided that you have illumination. DM: A draft blows out your torch, and now you can't see what you are doing. You have only one hand free, but you need that light. DM: Something bites your hand while you reach inside the wall. You take 1 damage. You may try again with a -2 penalty, but what ever bit you is still in there. DM: You can't see what you are doing, because some of your party members are blocking your light. If they get out of the way, you may try again with a +1 bonus. DM: While your hand is inside the wall, you suddenly hear footsteps approaching. If you pull out your hand now, you may set off the trap. What do you do? (50% chance that the trap activates if the player pulls out his hand) DM: Your hand is just slightly too big to fit inside the wall. But with some lubrication you may be able to get your hand into the wall to reach it's mechanism. DM: You attempt to disable the mechanism, but some of the machinery is pretty old. You may need to oil it up a bit, before you can disable the trap. In its current state, you are not sure if the trap is still dangerous. It might be jammed completely. But perhaps it is better to be on the safe side. (Requiring players to use other items in their inventory is always fun)
|
| #17bawylieMay 15, 2015 7:32:06 | Some of you are pros at this. Good!
And you can see the reason we break this down and examine it. We want something fun to happen, or something that at least doesn't stop the game totally.
When im DMing, I don't take the time to break down each action and write out potential failures (that would also stop the game). But I do try to weigh the players' goals and approaches to see if some interesting thing can be teased out of failure. I have more time to think out of combat than in, so it's easier some times than others.
But it works for every action, to find the most metal way to fail. And once youre pro, you'll have an easier time doing this even in combat. |
| #18pukunuiMay 15, 2015 16:19:45 | OK, I've got some scenarios:
1) The PCs are navigating through a misty forest full of broken terrain. The DMG presents a couple of hard DCs for navigating through various types of terrain, with the consequence of failure being that you get lost and have to spend 1d6 hours getting back on track before you can make another roll. Is that good enough, or could/should there be other consequences of failure?
2) The PCs find some tracks and want to follow them. The DMG presents DCs and modifiers to the DCs for following tracks. What happens if the PCs fails the check? Ordinarily, you'd just say they lose the trail. What else could happen on a failure? |
| #19BadMeepleMay 18, 2015 2:41:26 |
|
| #20ImaculataMay 18, 2015 4:25:49 |
|
| #21ImaculataMay 18, 2015 4:23:38 | If they fail their climb check:
1.) Causal (Failure to execute properly):
DM: While climbing the wet roots of an old gnarled tree, you suddenly lose your grip. You slide down a rocky wall, and into a tight crevice. Make a dex check / reflex check to stop your downward descend. Your party members will have to find a way to pull you up. DM: The rough terrain makes progress difficult. You are constantly climbing over fallen trees, getting entangled in branches and roots, and slipping across muddy terrain. You end up taking much longer to pass through the forest, simply because it is so hard to navigate. DM: You make it through the forest, but one of you sprains his ankle along the way, making progress much slower. It will take 1d4 days to heal naturally, unless you receive care. Any healing will do the trick. DM: The branches and thorns tear at your clothing, and the thick mud ruins your boots. By the time you reach the end of the forest, your clothes have paid the price. You'll need to get new footwear and a new coat.
2.) Consequential (Failure to Achieve Goal):
DM: Progress through the forest is slow. The roots cling to your feet at every step, the ground is muddy and makes each step even heavier. And on top of that, there are so many fallen trees to climb over. It isn't long before you are all completely exhausted. You have to take a rest. DM: You feel your boots sinking into the mud with every step, yet keep going, but eventually you become completely stuck. Make strength checks to pull yourself free. DM: The roots of the ancient trees are dug deep into the soil. They have broken it apart over decades, and the many rain showers have caused the soil to erode. Suddenly the earth gives way underneath your feet, as you uncover a giant sinkhole in the forest. Make dex checks to grab hold to anything within your grasp, to avoid falling. DM: The difficult terrain has forced your group to make many detours, in order to make any progress at all. But because of all this twisting and turning, you have kind of lost your way. Make a new group navigation check to find your way.
3.) Circumstantial (Failure Due to External Interference or Influence):
DM: A fallen tree seems to be the only means across a large crevice. But the muddy floor has made your boots slippery, and the thick fog plays tricks with your senses. Make a balance check to keep yourself from falling. DM: Your progress is halted by a natural rocky wall. It seems that shifting in the earth has lifted up this part of the forest, and it is quite a tricky climb. The rocks look wet and slippery, as do the roots that cover it. You can try to climb across (climb check), or find a way around (journey takes longer). DM: You reach a part of the forest where the overhanging branches are simply too dense. You will either have to chop your way through, which is slow. Or find a way around (make a new group navigation check). DM: While traveling through the forest, you are surprised by a downpour of rain. The dead trees offer little protection from the waves of water coming down at you from the heavens. Everything turns even more slippery than it already was, and the soil becomes so muddy that you sink into it knee deep. You are unable to travel any further, and must find some shelter. |
| #22bawylieMay 18, 2015 8:10:46 | Good all around. I think if there's one thing to pull out of this is that Something Must Happen, especially on a failure.
This is only part of how we handle adjudications, but in the main, the consequences or results of player decisions need to carry weight.
This is how we avoid situations like multiple checks for one goal ("Uh, you're picking the lock but it didn't work and isn't picked. Do you want to keep picking it?"). That's not a choice at all.
The consequences are meaningless.
But if failure were to change the scenario substantively, that's more metal. Y'dig? |
| #23ImaculataMay 19, 2015 4:29:21 | I've always felt that nothing is more anticlimactic, than a weapon breaking, or a player simply taking damage upon rolling a 1. What I want as a DM, is to increase the tension. So with failing to disable a trap, I want the actual disabling to feel dangerous, stressful and exciting. If players fail their navigation check, I want to enhance the dread of the area they are in (the foggy woods are made even spookier), and I want to add flavor and detail to the situation. A failed climb check is cause for an exciting action scene, where a player almost falls to his death, and his party members rush in to help him.
So I totally agree. A critical failure should move the story forward. It doesn't have to be a whole chapter, but make it metal, make it exciting. Don't make the player feel bad for failing. Make him feel excited. |
| #24bawylieMay 19, 2015 7:19:10 | I think the key to it is to avoid punishing. The failure itself isn't a function of a bad decision, it's a bad die roll. So while we should move toward more metal failures, Im reluctant to punish a player for bad luck. Such as breaking a sword or causing damage (in combat).
Dropping a weapon, or something like that, something that eats a little time or causes a missed opportunity, I'm ok with. Idk though, that's maybe down to personal preference. |
| #25durntaurMay 19, 2015 9:07:55 |
|
| #26ImaculataMay 20, 2015 3:30:33 |
|
| #27bawylieMay 20, 2015 7:21:51 | You can definitely do more - I was drawing a distinction on mechanics alone. I'd absolutely McClane it up in the description. |
| #28pukunuiMay 23, 2015 15:25:35 | I've got one from last night's Hoard of the Dragon Queen session.
*SPOILERS AHEAD*
During the raid on Greenest in Episode I, the PCs can get sent on a mission to prevent the town's mill being burned down. The module states that if the PCs spend at least a minute observing the cultists around the mill, they can make either a DC 15 Wisdom (Insight) or Charisma (Performance)* to notice that it's a ruse - that the cultists are just pretending to set fire to the mill. The default failure condition is simply that the PCs fail to spot the trap and walk right into it.
What other failure conditions could there be? One thing I thought of just now was that failure on the roll could still allow for the PCs to spot the trap but that they would be spotted and attacked by another group of cultists before they could do anything with their knowledge.
*Personally I would've made it an Intelligence (Performance) check, since the intent seems to be more about testing the character's ability to recognize a performance ... |
| #29ZortchMay 23, 2015 17:47:19 | An skill check failure leading immediately to a combat may not be ideal. (/ref{Combat is Not a Punishment}{ http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4217761 })
I'm not familiar with the module, so I'll have to speculate... What is the cultists goal? They are pretending to set fire to the mill, but are actually setting up a trap for the PCs? I presume that the PCs will end up fighting the cultists over the mill one way or the other... Perhaps a failed skill check here gives the cultists ample time to set up some archers in defensive positions on top of the mill. Or they set up some swinging flour sac traps, or prepare to send one of the giant mill stones rolling towards the PCs as part of the trap. Even with the failed check the PCs would realize that the cultists are not really setting fire to the mill, but now when they go to attack it will be that much harder. A success could offer the information that it is a trap, but also perhaps suggest that approaching from the south east will catch some of the cultists offguard. To quote from the article referenced above “If you succeed at this skill check, you get to have a fight on your terms. If you fail, you fight on the enemy’s terms.” |
| #30pukunuiMay 23, 2015 18:01:32 |
|
| #31iserithMay 23, 2015 19:59:19 |
|
| #32pukunuiMay 23, 2015 21:32:38 | Not a bad idea. I'll have to post any others that come up *before* I run them. |