thread: 2010-06-14 : A Bit of Hardcore
On 2010-06-17, Rafael wrote:
On to the individual replies:
bg Josh: So on one hand a game that depends entirely on the memory, skill and talent of the GM and in the other all that is taken care of by a simple mechanic.
This seems to me to be the key point. I agree that being a good classic GM is hard. I don't see that the task resolution mechanic actually solves the problem, though. That seems like saying "describing a location evocatively is hard, so let's have the players pick some adjectives and then roll to see which one applies."
Teataine: What Jim said. :)
Simon R.: It's fun to roll to see if you defeat the monster, but rolling to see if you find a book in a library? Not so much.
I think that's because, in real life, we see the results of a fair fight as indeterminate, but the book is either there or it isn't. Therefore, rolling the fight makes the experience more real, whereas rolling the book makes it less real. That's exactly my beef with task resolution.
Christian Griffen: anyone going out to save the guy rolls D6. 1, you're fine. 2-3, you're hurt. 4-5, you'll suffer severe, lasting wounds. 6 and you're dead.
I understand you, and agree in principle about dice lifting the burden, but don't like this approach here; instead, I would use description and a crescendo of consequences to allow the players to make informed decisions and accept the results. Dice would be used for details or to decide between multiple acceptably dramatic and realistic outcomes:
When the players open the door, dozens of locusts fly in, stinging (or whatever) wildly. If the players slam the door shut, they are only lightly injured (roll dice for details). If they decide to go out anyway, ask who goes first. If no one wants to go first, you're done; otherwise that character is severely but not permanently wounded (roll dice for details) as soon as he steps outside. If he runs back, you're done; otherwise his woulds get progressively worse and longer-term over time. If you think it would violate realism or drama for him to save the NPC, make it clear in advance how hopeless that is ("you can't even see him for locusts; if you go any further you won't be able to find your safe building anymore"). If you think that, having chosen to take the risk, the only satisfying result would be having him save the NPC, roll a lot of dice and let the rescue succeed regardless of what they say. If you think that either outcome could be cool, by all means make a roll to decide the NPCs fate, but the injuries are permanent regardless.
Realism, drama, consequences clearly communicated to the players, and you didn't have to pick a victim arbitrarily.
