Building Bhakashal - Rolling Dice, Slaying Dragons, Randomization as a Play Style

I have run AD&D in different iterations and flavors for the last 40+ years. I’ve tried a lot of different things, from one summer campaign where I did ALL the rolling for everyone, they just got the narrations, to a college game where we were always in character at the table, so no OOC or metagame talk allowed. We ran “AD&D” in space for a while, and tried various “no magic-users”, “no clerics” or “no humanoid monster” campaigns.

There are many variations on how you can run the game.

Bhakashal will contain a lot of advice for running the game at the table. The rules are the rules, how you implement them is part of the art of running a game and what makes every table its own unique experience. The goal with Bhakashal is to create a game that has a flavor and a feel to it, and there are a number of practices that support this. Today’s discussion is dice rolling.

Dice are magical. They trigger an automatic interest, as the result can have a direct impact on the PCs. As a referee they are an invaluable tool in creating excitement at the table. My players always want to know the result of the dice roll, and they are always happy with a success and unhappy with a failure. 

That dichotomy feeds investment, immersion and engagement. Players want to know the result of the roll, and not just because it is interesting, also as it speaks to fairness.

As a result Bhakashal has play-style guidelines for the use of dice in the game that maximize this impact. 

Why Dice?

You can free form improv a game of D&D, riffing off of the player choices and the environment, dice are not needed to play a role playing game. Indeed, in principle a referee with enough experience could adjudicate most things that you roll for without them. However, this misses out on the many benefits of dice rolling for the game.

Bhakashal adopts the radical idea that the dice serve as a focal point for the game, and specifically that randomization of as much as possible is good for the game. There are a number of reasons for this, but the main ones are fairness, excitement, unpredictability, generative power, improvisation and responsibility.

Rolling dice improves fairness. People will point out that the DM can always screw over the players, and of course this is true. When you control the ENTIRE GAME WORLD EXCEPT FOR THE PCS, then dice are only one of limitless tools at your disposal to “cheat” them of victory. 

However, this misses an important point. When the appropriate rule is known to all, and the dice are rolled, and the referee stands by the result, it demonstrates to the players that the game world has a somewhat predictable structure to it, and thus they can trust it, and the referee, to behave in predictable ways. This shows the players that the game is, to whatever degree possible, fair and impartial.

Rolling dice creates excitement, players want to know the results, dice rolling gets their attention and brings them back into the process when they drift out for whatever reason, and dice rolls determine important outcomes, and are thus exciting more or less by default.

Rolling dice adds unpredictability. This is important for the players as too much predictability makes the game dull. Like it or not, referees fall into patterns, similar NPCs, similar tactics, that sort of thing. Dice rolling throws some unpredictability into the mix. It is also important for referees as it allows them to be surprised. When you have so much control it can be refreshing to be surprised by the outcome of a dice roll. Unpredictability makes for enjoyable gaming for everyone. It also makes encounters more challenging, as enemies have tactical opacity, if enemies always optimize tactical choices they become predictable, keeping randomness in combat makes opponents hard to predict, and thus harder to fight.

Dice have generative power, the easiest way I have to explain this is to point at the various rules and tables in AD&D and Bhakashal. These tables allow you to generate a stunning variety of things, from encounter reaction rolls to combat hits to demons to magic swords to dungeons to random encounters to the content of city wards. The latter is a great example. Bhakashal is VERY LARGE, there are more than 1000 buildings in the city, if I had chosen to detail each and every one and it’s inhabitants it would have been prohibitively large, instead I built tables and the referee generates the required information in play. 

Dice aid with improvisation. Bhakashal is run in sandbox style, it is improvisation heavy, you will be required to pivot a lot as the players take the game in unexpected directions. To help with this. Bhakashal is built on the framework of RRTEI, Roll Randomly Then Explain It. The dice give you prompts, it is up to the referee to interpret those prompts. Interpreting unexpected dice rolls has produced some of the most interesting and rewarding gaming experiences I have ever had, as they push you in unexpected directions.  

Finally, dice remove some of the responsibility from the referees shoulders. Refereeing involves a LOT of decision making. This can become intimidating after a while. Dice change that process from decision making to interpretation of results. These two processes occupy your brain in different ways, making a decision about what to do can be paralyzing as you focus on trying to determine the best choice, whereas interpreting a result chosen by the dice involves creativity, and is both more enjoyable and, at least I find, easier to do once I have a prompt.

With these in mind, here are Bhakashal’s guidelines for dice rolling.

The Basics

1. Roll for everything

2. Never fudge, the dice land where they may

3. Always explain odds before rolling

4. Allow player input into odds for rolls

The Advanced

1. Roll For Everything

Well, not everything, but almost everything. 

First there are the obvious things like saving throws, to hit rolls, etc. These go without saying.

Treasure

Always roll randomly for treasure, both for it’s potential presence and for what treasure is in the hoard. The treasure tables are weighted so powerful items are more rare, so you don’t need to select them, let them happen as you roll. Treasure, even mundane magic, can be game changing, so rolling randomly really shakes things up. Rolling a powerful item when the party is low level can lead to all sorts of adventures, powerful items attract powerful people. 

This means that sometimes you fight a monster and get nothing, but that just encourages the party to avoid unnecessary risk. People ask why D&D games get violent, well, if you know you get loot whenever you fight, you fight a lot!

Spells

When generating NPCs, or when generating pregens, roll randomly for spells. When rolling up scroll spells in treasure hoards, roll the spells randomly as well. Randomization of spells makes casters unpredictable. There are literally hundreds of spells available to the PCs and NPCs of the game world; randomization of these spells means that each warlock is unique in a meaningful way. I can’t express how much flavor and fun this has added to my game world.

People complain that D&D magic is dull and vanilla, but they don’t randomize their spell allocation!

Random Encounters

Travel and exploration of any kind should be risky. The game world is dangerous, this is one of the basic conceits of Bhakashal and AD&D as well. Whenever you travel from point A to B, there is a chance of an encounter. The encounter tables are weighted in such a way that only some encounters are with potentially deadly creatures, and encounter reaction rolls ensure that not every encounter is a fight. 

Randomization of encounter rolls creates an organic, real feeling to the world, like it is beyond the control of either the referee or the players. The lack of predictability means you will have some sessions where travel is smooth and easy, others where it is troubled, but you won’t be able to predict it either way. This leads the PCs to be more cautious, avoid unnecessary conflict, and plan out their travel to avoid potential dangers. It also makes travel an event, not just the liminal space between encounters. 

So for example, the players will have to choose between taking well known routes that are safer and longer rather than new routes that are more dangerous but faster. They will contact local guides and form alliances to avoid dangerous creatures, use information gathering spells to avoid problem areas (e.g. Speak with Animals), all because they cannot predict when an encounter will happen, but they know there is a chance…

NPC Actions

Then there are things that are in the rules but not used as often, like morale, loyalty, encounter reaction rolls. These are all rolled for in Bhakashal. Bhakashal also alters the encounter reaction rules so they can be used even without parley. 

These rules point to an important nexus in the game: the behavior of NPCs. There is nothing that brings more “reality” to an NPC, IMO, than randomization. Henchmen who roll for loyalty and morale for example. Encounter reaction rolls mean that not every encounter has to be a fight, and the party forms more alliances and gathers more information than games where every opponent attacks. So all of the standard rules for NPC behavior should be used. 

Bhakashal also adds to these sorts of rolls in various ways. One example is NPC decision making. The encounter reaction table determines the positivity or negativity of the NPCs reaction, but the course of action is not specified. That’s context specific. However, there is a tendency to pick the “optimal” course of action in cases like this, Bhakashal recommends instead that you dice for this.

So if a NPC merchant rolls a very positive reaction to the PCs bargaining, rather than just dropping the price, the referee would come up with a list of options. For the sake of speed and brevity I usually use a d6 in some combination for this. So if I have 6 ideas I assign one to each pip of the d6, if I have 4 ideas I assign more than one pip to several, etc. In the case of our merchant:

1. Merchant lowers price 20%

2. Merchant lowers price 50%

3. Merchant gives the PCs advice on where to find accompanying item

4. Merchant offers accompanying item for free

5. Merchant offers better quality item for same price

6. Merchant refuses payment and offers item for free as a “trade for later favor”

Ther referee would roll and interpret the result, there has to be a reason why the merchant is being nice, the encounter reaction roll just tells you he’s being nice. The point of coming up with options like this is to keep things interesting, and to generate some prompts for role play. Option 6, for example, is ripe for future adventuring.

Once you get into the habit of doing this it becomes second nature. Every time the PCs interact with an NPC, the encounter reaction table comes into play, and you come up with potential responses, each of which creates possible prompts for future events.

Note that you aren’t rolling for every response, you roll when the NPC is at a decision point. You don’t roll for everything the NPC says. In a typical exchange you will roll once or twice for encounter reactions. 

Player Questions

Another way in which you can incorporate randomization is to use it in response to player questions about the game world and environment. Whether by design or by circumstance, the referee’s job is very often to choose between options when something has not been specified. I would conservatively estimate that this happens multiple times in every session I have ever run. It can be anything. 

Does the weaponsmith have an exotic weapon in his shop? 

Are there enough of a particular kind of flower in the forest to feed the PCs exotic pet?

Are there any mercenaries in this tavern that have sailors skills?

Are there small animals your mount might want to hunt and eat near this river?

Are there any white robes hanging on that clothesline the PC can steal for a disguise? 

Does anyone on the ship speak Sahuagin? 

Unless you plan on detailing EVERY possible encounter area and every aspect of your game world, sometimes you will have to wing this sort of thing.

You can, of course, just decide these things. But that robs your table of the opportunity to let the dice decide, to create some excitement and uncertainty. Whenever PCs ask these questions, resolve them with a dice roll. This lets them know that the game world is independent of them but rich and deep enough to be worth plumbing. Rather than just looking for a spell solution (“Wait, I think I have Tongues to speak to the Sahuagin), or hoping for the referee to save you, if the players know that questions like this are amenable to dice rolls, then they will ask more of them. 

And it aids immensely for immersion and engagement. Take the following scenario, the party thief is fleeing from the city guards, as he runs he looks down an alley and sees a set of clotheslines hung between buildings, laden with clothing. He decides that he wants a long cloak to help him blend into the crowd, is there a long cloak of this kind on the clotheslines?

Some referees would just say, “no” as they do not like ‘happy coincidences’. Others would just say, “yes”, as they want to encourage lateral thinking. I prefer to dice for this sort of thing, as it means it is not up to me. I don’t want my players thinking that they have to please me to get things in the game, e.g. if I butter up the referee he will make sure that the clothesline always has a cloak. I also don’t want the referee to just say, “no” all the time, as I want to encourage PCs to do things other than stare at their character sheet. I want the party to ask if anyone on ship speaks sahuagin if they need to speak to the sahuagin. 

So when players ask questions about the game world and things are not specified, assign odds and roll for them. 

Gygax essentially recommends this approach for any time you don’t have an applicable rule but it doesn’t seem obvious that the result would be one way or another. 

I heartily endorse this.

Animal/Monster/NPC Actions

In combat Bhakashal recommends that you randomize actions by opponents. This is somewhat counterintuitive, and admits to some exceptions, but the general idea is that randomization of combat makes it more interesting and more challenging. There is a tendency to optimize opponent actions, taking advantage of the referees “god’s eye knowledge” of the system to maximize their efficiency. I find this both dull, predictable and, in the end, counterproductive. 

Optimization is predictable, randomization is not. Once you start running your foes this way it creates a totally different experience of combat. 

So for example, say the party is fighting a dragon, there is a tendency to have the creature strafe the party with breath weapons once or twice, then spells, then melee attacks if desperate. This sort of pattern is easily identified, and applied to the wider population of monsters becomes predictable behavior. Instead, Bhakashal suggests that you roll when a monster has multiple attack modes. So sometimes they will “pick” the most advantageous attack, sometimes not. But the surprise factor alone can make a huge difference. 

So for example, dragons can use a CCB routine, a breath weapon, or a spell when they attack. When the dragon attacks the party, the referee will explicitly tell them, “I’m rolling a d6 to see if the dragon attacks by 1-2: breath weapon, 3-4: CCB, 5-6: spell, then you roll in the open to get the result.

I once rolled and had a dragon attack first by landing on the party tank and tearing into him with claw and bite. This caught them off guard and the party panicked, using AOE spells on the dragon, hurting it and the tank at the same time. 

Oops.

Many monsters have multiple attack modes, so they are amenable to this sort of randomization. Sometimes circumstances will force your hand, if the monster is in melee range their distance attack may not be usable, but I find that in MANY cases there is more than one option on the table, perfect for randomization. 

Note that you choose what to randomize when running NPCs, so for example, if the NPC warlock has offensive, defensive and miscellaneous spells, as well as a dagger, and the party is attacking, you don’t roll to see if the NPC charges forth with his dagger rather than casting a spell. Randomization has to be somewhat sensible. But you can randomize in this situation between an offensive or defensive spell, and then between the various offensive or defensive spells, depending on what you have chosen.

2. No Fudging

No fudging, ever. If you roll, you take the result, no exceptions. This is a bedrock of the system Bhakashal puts forward. EVERY dice roll is an opportunity for the referee to interpret the results for the players, it is the nexus point of the referee’s interaction with the game world, it is where the world comes alive. This means sometimes bad things will happen to PCs, but that’s the nature of the game. This nature should be very clearly explained before you roll dice the first time. Everyone needs to know that the dice stand, so they may make decisions appropriately.

3. Roll in the Open 

As often as possible the referee should roll in the open. Open rolls ensure that the referee is not fudging, and allow the players to experience the excitement of watching the result. Both are key components in exciting gaming. 

This includes many rolls that are traditionally done in private. Bhakashal is very transparent about game mechanics, even though some will find this immersion breaking in various ways. So for example, when a thief makes a move silently roll, they see the results. If they fail to move silently the referee interprets that as them making a noise, but they see the result as it happens

If a thief makes a hide in shadows roll it is done in the open, and if they fail, the referee narrates the result as it happens. This removes the possibility of the player not knowing if they are hidden or not. I used to find this problematic, but I found that, in game, it rarely mattered. Using the “you hide the result” method I would roll unseen, then if they failed I would inform the player that “the guards shout and shoot in your direction”, which essentially revealed the result right after it was rolled anyway. 

Find/Remove traps is another area where it seems natural to hide the roll. 

Instead, consider the options rolling in the open:

1. They make the “find” roll and find the trap

2. They fail the “find” roll, and you tell them, “you don’t find a trap”. They know they failed the roll, so there might still be a trap there, but trying again takes time and prompts another wandering monster roll or possible detection

3. Let’s say they find the trap, now they roll to remove it, they make the roll, and they disarm the trap

4. Or, they fail the roll to remove the trap, they see the result, so they know they have failed, and will have to try again. 

Note three things about FRT rolls: a) you roll both to find and to remove, b) each attempt takes a turn (so 20 min min to find and remove a trap), and c) if you fail your “remove” by more than ½ of the base percentage chance (e.g. if your base chance is 40 and you roll higher than 60) you have triggered the trap. So there is still risk and tension even though the player knows their result, and since it takes time, they can try again, it just runs the risk of further encounters. 

Note that this does eliminate the possibility of the player thinking they have disarmed the trap but then being caught by it as they didn’t see their roll. So you do lose that. But you still have the possibility of accidentally setting off the trap, and the process still takes time, so there is still risk and excitement, but in this case the player gets to see their rolls and learn their fate when you do. 

Finally, there will be times when you are choosing between options and you don’t want the players to know what all the options are. TSay the party boards the ship of a group of pirates, and sees an enemy warlock. 

The referee announces that the warlock is deciding between casting a spell or using a magic item, then rolls for that out in the open. This is important as it shows the players that the referee isn’t taking advantage of their “insider knowledge” to select the perfect spell or item to use, instead they are rolling for the action.

Sometimes there will be things going on in the background that the PCs are unaware of and you just don’t want to share them. For these instances, Bhakshal recommends partial opacity. Say the PCs are robbing a castle, and the castle guards who were out on patrol will be returning soon, when they do they will find the PCs about their business. I’m rolling to see when they come back, I don’t want the PCs knowing what I’m rolling for, but I do want them to know I’m rolling, to create tension. So the referee makes the roll, and tells them, “If I roll low, that’s bad, if I roll high, that’s good”, then you roll. They don’t know WHY it’s bad that you rolled low, but they do start to anticipate the worst. 

4. Explaining/Negotiating Odds 

One way you can give players agency, and make the game more fair, is to explain your odds before rolling. Sometimes this is complementary, as the PCs already know their odds, saving throws are an example of this. So if the enemy wizard shoots a lightning bolt at the PC, they look at their saving throw then roll, they know the odds of success/failure. 

But sometimes the players do not know the odds. In Bhakashal players know the odds of success/failure before any rolls where their character would reasonably be able to know the result through observation. Part of what makes rolls exciting is knowing the conditions of failure/success. 

However, this does not mean the PCs get to be informed about ALL rolls, just those where their PC would be able to know given the circumstances. 

So for example, the PC thief decides they want to break into a random building the party is passing in the dead of night. The building might be occupied, it might be empty. Say the PC finds a window and peers inside. So the ref announces:

“It’s night time, this is a commercial area, so there are good odds the building is not being used for its commercial purpose, that doesn’t mean there might not be security, or spells protecting things, but let’s see if there is anyone working late and using the space at this time of night. I’ll give it a 4 in 6 that the occupant is absent, a 2 in 6 they are in and working late.”

The ref would then roll in the open, say they got a 3.

Ref - “3 - absent. The lights are all off, and the front counter you can see from the window is deserted. You can’t see the whole inside of the building from here, but from what you can see the proprietor is not present.”

The window is locked, so the thief rolls a successful Open Locks and enters. 

Ref - “Roll a d6 for surprise”

The player rolls a 4, no surprise on them.

Ref - “I roll a 1, I’m surprised! You step into the room and though the room was mostly empty, there was a large snake coiled up on the floor that you couldn’t see from the window. It appears to be asleep on the floor, you have won the surprise roll, what do you do?”

Now, go back to the point where the ref was rolling to determine if anyone was in the building or not. Let’s say they announce their odds as above, 

“It’s night time, this is a commercial area, so there are good odds the building is not being used for its commercial purpose, that doesn’t mean there might not be security, or spells protecting things, but let’s see if there is anyone working late and using the space at this time of night. I’ll give it a 4 in 6 that the occupant is absent, a 2 in 6 they are in and working late.”

When the referee announces the odds, they then ask the table if anyone has anything that might alter those odds. This is an opportunity for the players to become actively involved in the game world. So let’s say that this is a jeweler's shop, and at the present time there is a festival going on in town where the locals wear silver pendants to honor a particular god. So one of the players speaks up and says:

Player - “It’s Jannak’s festival, everyone is wearing those pendants, wouldn’t there be a greater chance that the proprietor would be up late working on orders at this time of year, it’s a jewelers shop after all”

And then the referee and players talk it out. Bhakashal recommends that everyone at the table agrees to the odds, and knows the odds before rolling. I’ve had a ton of fun doing this. I had a player who knew more about swamps and marshes than I do inform me that the chances of leaving a visible trail in certain kinds of soil were greater, so the odds of finding that trail should be better, I’ve had players convince me that they had more cover than the odds reflected, there have been many opportunities for the players to chime in and influence the rolls at the table. This approach makes the players far more invested in learning about the environment for the encounter, and absorbing as much of the game world as possible, so they can capture advantages. It rewards immersion and involvement. And it requires group assent, so it has less potential for abuse.

5. Situational Modifiers - There are two forms of situational modifiers in Bhakashal that apply to rolls. Front facing and back facing. 

Front Facing Situational Modifiers - There are many of these in regular D&D, so for example, if you have a ranger in your party then the group’s odds of being surprised are reduced to 1 in 6 from 2 in 6. So they are modified BEFORE you make the roll. Note that these can be beneficial to the roller or punitive, depending on the situation. The referee can alter these odds for many different reasons, as long as they inform the players of the modification, so they are aware of it before they roll, it is fine. 

Back Facing Situational Modifiers - This one requires a bit of explanation, and will start with an example. Almost every rule in Bhakashal is based on an in-game experience of ours. A PC thief had broken into the second floor of a merchant’s home. There were two guards indoors on the first floor, and two on the grounds. The thief climbed the wall and gained access. He stepped into the room and wanted to walk quietly through the room, exit, walk down the hall and enter a different room. In Bhakashal you get two rolls for this if you are a thief, a regular surprise roll, and a “move silently” roll, all other classes only get the surprise roll. Well, the PC failed both rolls, so they did not move silently. 

I was about to have the guards come up the stairs, when I paused. What if the merchant got up in the middle of the night and walked around, would the guards come running? Did he do this regularly, or sleep like the dead? This merchant’s home was in a large, busy urban area, there are likely lots of noises at night, would they even notice? What if they were playing cards and distracted? In short, they might hear the noise upstairs, but ignore it until they heard more noise, or it was louder, etc. 

You could simply say that since the thief failed the roll, then they both heard the noise and will react to it, which is essentially saying that the failure must have a negative consequence associated with it. I prefer the flexibility of making additional rolls with similar results.

So when this happened in game, I told the player that they had made a noise, but the guards might not respond to the noise, they could be playing cards and ignore it, they could think it was their boss, etc. I came up with some possibilities, and assigned a d6 to them. The idea is that you weigh the options to an unfavorable result (as the PC failed the roll) but give them a few other options as well. Once you have your list, you announce it to the players, give them a chance to argue for different odds, then set the results, inform the players, and roll. For example:

1 - Guards ignore noise as they think it’s just their boss moving around

2 - Guards ignore noise as they are playing a game

3 - Guards ignore noise as they don’t care about their employer and plan to arrive after an intruder has had the opportunity to slay him

4-6 - they investigate

So in this case, the roll was a 2, they heard the noise but just ignored it as they were deeply into a dice game. Now, the thief checked out the second room, and then left and went to another. Another pair of rolls were made, and they failed both rolls again.

I was going to roll again to see what the guards would do. However, as they had already heard a noise once and ignored it, I decided this time that the odds would be different:

1 - Guards ignore it as they are still into their game

2 - One goes to investigate, the other remains

3-6 - they both go to investigate

So the second time it was much more likely they would investigate the noise.

In general, you make front facing situational modifiers because you think of a relevant modifier before you make the roll, you make back facing modifiers because you think of a relevant modifier after you make the roll.

It is important to acknowledge that this can happen. On a few occasions players have suggested that a factor should have influenced the odds, and the back facing modifier allows you to address that without voiding the first roll.

Conclusions

This all may seem very counterintuitive, negotiating odds, informing players of those odds before rolling, rolling in the open for everything, these moves give the players information they might not otherwise have, and this takes away some of the mystery and control from the referee. 

However, what it gives back pays you over a hundredfold, you get unpredictability, tactical opacity, flavor, fairness, excitement and a sense that the game is to some degree objective and independent of both the players and the referee. The players stop looking to the referee to see what they are doing and start looking to the dice to see how their actions are resolved. It’s a subtle but important switch. They feel empowered as they know they are not at the whims of a referee who wants to “tell a story”, and they have a sense of achievement as they know that the ref didn’t fudge in their favor, everyone agreed on the odds then they rolled, so if they succeed, it’s all on them. 

But beyond all of this, embracing randomization has made my job as referee 1000x easier. I don’t need to worry about decisions, fear that I’m not optimizing, agonize over which option to choose, instead I let the dice do that, and my job becomes interpreting the results. I know that what happens at the table is meaningfully emergent, not just pulled whole cloth from my head, and I’m as surprised as my players at how things turn out. The combination of unpredictability, reduction of the burden on the referee to make decisions, and the near infinite generative capacity of random rolling + weighted tables to save me creating the whole world before we even start playing, has made refereeing both fresher, more fun and less work. 

Sometimes the dice give the players an easy fight, sometimes a hard one, but in neither case do I feel the need to “fix” anything, something I see people agonizing about every day on social media. “How could I have made it harder/easier”, is a common question, but if you embrace randomization, you need not ask it at all.