Moving it Along

I thought I would dedicate the first content post of the blog to something useful to budding game masters out there. 

I recently heard about Burning Wheel’s “Let it ride” mechanic (apologies if I get this wrong, I’m just reporting what I saw). In that system, you get one shot to apply a skill to some task, if that fails, you are done, you don’t get to keep trying over and over. So say you were playing a thief picking a lock on a door, or a fighter trying to break in a door, you would get one chance and if you failed it would be beyond your ability.

For lack of a better term I will call this a negative game mechanic, it restricts the players in some way to achieve an end, in this case to keep them from essentially gaming the system by trying something over and over again. D+D is a game after all, and sometimes you have to move it along or it becomes dull for the players.

Negative game mechanics are legitimate and useful, and are folded into the game everywhere. For example, in early edition D+D you get one opportunity per round to damage an opponent, rather than multiple attempts. That’s a negative mechanic as it prevents a player from doing something multiple times.

However, negative mechanics work best when they don’t curtail player agency. Agency is the ability of players to do things, try things, to act in the game. For the most part you don’t want mechanics that limit player agency too much, as agency is what makes the game enjoyable, being able to act and do things, even if they fail, is part of the visceral thrill of D+D.

And that’s why I don’t like negative mechanics for things like skill checks.

Rather than simply saying, “you can’t do that”, I prefer to let the players try the skill check multiple times if desired. When this is done, time passes. Time in D+D is a useful tool for the game master. In D+D when time passes in a dangerous environment, you roll for a “wandering monster check”. The game’s baseline assumption is that the adventuring environment is dangerous most of the time, the world is filled with monsters, so when you spend an extended period of time doing something, your chances of encountering something dangerous increases.

I like this solution for a few reasons:

1)      It encourages the players to move it along, wandering monster checks are a drain of resources needed for other objectives.

2)      It adds excitement to the skill check, rolling for success is exciting, rolling for success while waiting for an ogre to eat you is even more exciting.

3)      It gives the rest of the party something to do, specifically keep on the lookout, as surprise in D+D is deadly. Ff you are all huddled around the door while the thief picks a lock…

4)      It allows players to have more agency.

You are still within your purview as a DM to simply say, “that’s impossible”, or if you prefer, let them try over and over again and fail, but I find the game opens up more if you allow the players to try things, even crazy things. Giving more agency to players makes them feel more capable and that their desires can be channeled into in game actions.  

There is a “knock on” effect to this. If players get used to you saying, “that’s impossible” rather than “sure, it’s hard, but give it a try if you want”, they stop trying things, why bother if the DM always says “no”? Or even worse, they only do things described on their character sheet, they think “inside the box” as they feel their crazy ideas will be nerfed. 

The more game actions you can allow the players to try, the bigger the scope of their game, and the more they get to “inhabit” their characters.

Combat should be fast and furious, but skill checks need not be. Using wandering monster rolls to keep the players on their toes is a great way to build tension in the game, I know my players always look terrified when they see me picking up that wandering monster die and smiling while they perform some task.

Player: “Can I try to open the door again?”

DM: “Sure you can...”