Building Bhakashal – Randomization
I built Bhakashal on a foundation of random rolling. This isn’t a particularly controversial idea, but the scope of the randomization is perhaps something that people might not be familiar with. There are several sources of randomization.
1. Tables
There are tables for spells, magic items, encounter tables,
personality types, gods, mounts, weather conditions and many other aspects of
the game.
One of the primary goals of this randomization was to allow
the referee and players, in tandem, to procedurally generate the game
world as they play, rather than detailing every aspect of the game world in
advance. The latter is simply impossible, and even the more restricted
guideline of detailing only what the referee thinks will be needed, is still
fundamentally challenging. One of the truisms of role-playing games is that the
players will go to places and do things you didn’t anticipate.
My original reason for using procedural generation was the
sheer size of Bhakashal as a city, I looked at the closest equivalent fantasy city
in size (The City State of the Invincible Overlord) and the sheer number of
entries was formidable. Either you would have a hopelessly large descriptive
section (which would be unwieldy) or you would pare down the details to the
point that the referee was generating a significant amount of material in play,
which defeats the purpose of providing such a descriptive section in the first
place.
As I progressed it became clear that procedural generation
using tables was the core mechanic for creating the setting. Rather than
pre-generating the content, I created weighted tables that allowed on
the spot generation of many aspects of the game world.
Note that weighted tables are key here, e.g., the odds for each option on the table
are not equal, they are weighted to reflect their commonality in the game
world. Thus, this isn’t complete randomization, it’s randomization within a set
of options that are determined by the nature of the game world.
In addition to allowing the referee to present a large game
setting without getting overwhelmed by the details, it also gives the game some
variety at each individual table. For example, spell casters with spell
selections determined by random generation are tactically opaque, e.g.,
you are unable to predict what spells you enemy casters will have, as spells
are randomly determined.
This has a myriad of benefits for game play.
Another benefit of randomized tables is the possibility of
solo play. All aspects of character generation, encounter creation, faction
interplay, every aspect of the game is driven by weighted random tables, so it
is possible to play solo without a referee if desired.
The last benefit to this randomization is spontaneity, not
only are the players surprised by what happens, but so too can the referee be
surprised by what happens. When running games, it is very easy to fall into
patterns that become predictable and unappealing for you and your players.
Randomization keeps things fresh.
2. In-Play Randomization
There are two kinds of randomization in-play of interest
here, encounter reaction rolls, and general odds rolls for actions. Both
require active interpretation of prompts by the referee.
NPC Encounter Reaction Rolls - Bhakashal expands upon
the traditional role of the encounter reaction mechanic by extending it to all
encounters in the game world, not just those between parties in “parley”.
Encounter reaction rolls are a mechanism for resolving NPC and monster actions
that allow the referee to use weighted randomization to choose rather than
choosing responses themselves.
Bargaining with the merchant for a new sword? Encounter
reaction rolls indicate if the merchant will be giving you a hard time. Ask the
caravan master to detour the caravan to allow the party to investigate a ruin?
Encounter reaction rolls determine if you are left to your own devices.
As a general rule, an encounter reaction roll is made
whenever a NPC has to make a decision, there is a conversation going back and
forth, and when the conversation leads to the NPC having to decide about
something, the roll is made.
Any given conversation will have a roll made, then the
conversation takes a new direction based
on the roll, and later in the conversation another roll will be made,
until the conversation ends through actions on the part of the participants.
The chief advantage to this system is that the referee is
called upon to interpret the result in question, and in doing so will end up
filling out some aspect of the game world. My favorite example of this happened
when a group of PCs where purchasing mounts, when the reaction roll came from
the merchant it was very positive, so he gave them a terrific deal.
However, as a referee I have to interpret that result, why
would a merchant give this random group of PCs a good deal? I decided on the
spot the merchant had been robbed recently, so he had to move stock in order to
make the gold necessary to pay off his debtors and suppliers.
The party asked why they were being given such a deal, the
merchant shared the information, and they decided to help the guy out. And that
became their first adventure.
In a more “traditional” game the purchasing of mounts could
be resolved by email between sessions, or it would be a matter of the referee
looking up the price and telling the PC, or perhaps adjusting based on the
setting economics. But it would be a passive, simple roll or determination. In
Bhakashal, there is an encounter, and an encounter reaction roll
shapes the response of NPCs to PC actions. Introducing encounter reaction rolls
to our game fundamentally changed the way we played, as it meant that:
a)
predicting outcomes became
harder
b)
there was no default to combat in regular NPC encounters
These things meant that the PCs gathered more information,
formed more alliances, and generally looked at NPC interaction differently.
Monster and Animal Encounter Reaction Rolls – Bhakashal
also has encounter reaction rolls for monsters. These are based on the
premise that monsters and animals will not automatically attack everything they
encounter. Monsters and animals are not stupid, they don’t attack large groups
unless the have the numbers, they don’t eat everything they encounter, etc.
Bhakashal uses a weighted table to determine how animals/monsters react to
threats, the weighting does make them tend towards hostility, but it leaves
open the possibility of peaceful interaction, or just fleeing the scene, so
every encounter isn’t guaranteed to end in violence.
General Odds Rolls for Actions
NPCs have to make decisions all of the time, and there are
times when those actions are not immediately spurred on by player actions. So
for example, a PC thief is watching a potential mark who is in their home. The home
has a strongbox, and the thief is waiting for the mark to move out of the room
where the strongbox is located so they can enter and try to steal it’s contents.
How long does the thief have to wait?
This may seem like a trivial decision, but there are
profound game play and fairness implications to these sorts of decisions. If
you decide that the NPC mark stays put a long time, the odds of the PC being
discovered increase. If you make them move sooner, the PC has better odds.
Referees make decisions like this all the time, and depending on how you rule, they can have a strong
impact on the game play for the PCs. A referee who routinely makes the mark
stay put a long time makes casing and stealing from marks much more
challenging, the ref that moves things along fast makes it much easier.
Essentially, any of these decisions impact play outside of
the application of the rules, if you make these decisions by fiat, there is
room for bias, or at the very least predictability on the referees part. If you
randomize these decisions, then there is less room for bias, and greater unpredictability.
Gygax suggests randomizing aspects of play not directly covered
by the rules, and Bhakashal embraces this idea enthusiastically. This sort of randomization
is also a fecund source for creating the lore and environment of the game
world.
Take another example, the PCs were travelling with a
caravan, and the caravan came to a section of the route that had rough terrain
that would make them vulnerable to attack while passing through. However, the most
expedient route around this terrain would delay them by an extra 2 days, the
least expedient route would delay by 3 days. What does the caravan do?
This is important as bandits monitor the rough terrain for
travellers they can waylay, and the odds of encountering someone (friend or
foe) on short detour are greatest. So, there are advantages and disadvantages
to both options. At this point I would randomize the choices available:
1 – Take a much longer detour (safest, longest time)
2-3 – Continue through the rough area (most dangerous,
fastest)
4-6 – Take shorter detour around the rough area (second
most dangerous, second fastest)
The idea here is that the caravan master will want to
minimize delays but maximize safety, arriving late is a big problem, arriving
without your goods is a bigger problem, so this is reflected in the weighting
of the odds, where the third option is the most likely.
Importantly, I narrate these choices to the party before
rolling in the open for the results. This gives them the opportunity to suggest
other options I may not have considered. For example, say one of the PCs
suggests using an illusion to deceive any potential bandits. That is something
that the caravan master would not have come up with, so it can be added to the
list when suggested.
Once the roll is made, the referee has to interpret
the result. So, say we rolled that the caravan master has decided to push
through the rough, dangerous area, the referee would have to explain that
decision if the PCs confronted the caravan master. That means the referee will
have to pull on the threads of the game world to determine why this decision was
made. Explaining the results of rolls is almost as much fun as making them. It
can be an opportunity for role-play (the caravan master has something to prove
to his boss), or an opportunity to drop adventure hooks (the caravan master is becoming
reckless as he has debt collectors on his tail and delays let them catch up).
I have adopted this process for all of these sorts of decisions
in the game, and it has led to some of the most interesting gaming experiences.
I find that one of the biggest challenges of being a referee is making an
almost endless stream of decisions about the game that aren’t really outlined
in the rules. For years I just picked based on instinct, or went with a default
decision to save time and effort. That sort of thing gets dull and predictable
really fast, and in doing so breaks immersion in an important way. The game
world feels less real if you can call what is going to happen all the time.
Randomization of these in game interstices, the spaces
that are not explicitly part of the rules but a significant part of game play,
makes the game far more fun, unpredictable and gives it a kind of depth that is
hard to emulate.
It also lessens the possibility of the referee being biased
against the PCs one way or the other. You have all no doubt played with the
referee who always ends up making these sorts of decisions in a way that is
harmful to the PCs.
PC - “Are there any ships in the harbor sailing to Monmurg?”
REF – “No, not today”
PC – “Does the merchant have any young, fast horses in their
inventory?”
REF – “I’m afraid not”
PC – “Are there enough branches lying around to start a
fire?”
REF– “No, there are not”
Alternately, there is the magical referee, who always seems
to answer “yes” to these sorts of questions.
Either referee is doing a disservice to the group, and in
many cases may not even be aware of it. And these sorts of decisions make a significant
difference to the game play experience. A referee who is constantly ruling against
the PCs in these cases creates a game world where the PCs are at a constant
disadvantage, luck, skill and planning aside.
Randomization of this kind is not for every referee. You
need to be able to list out and assign odds to a small number of options at a
moment’s notice. Thing is, I find that many people do this anyway when they are
trying to make a decision about what an NPC is about to do.
Bhakashal explodes this process for all to see, then
randomizes the results to make it exciting and unpredictable. And even more
than all of that, it makes the process fair. By opening it up to the players,
and rolling in the open, the players and the referee can see that there is no
bias in the result. Any bias that there is can be found in the generation of
the list of options, and as the players are given an opportunity to become
involved in the process, the bias is at the very least acceptable to all at the
table, which is all you can really ask for.
I think that the big advantage for me as a referee is that I
find coming up with options and assigning odds to be easy and making
choices to be hard. That difficulty is, in part, due to the fact that
after decades of running games I became aware how much these sorts of decisions
accumulate to shape the direction of play. I don’t want to have that sort of influence
at the table, I want to shape the overall options to fit the game world and
environment, but I don’t want to determine them completely, as it gives me
outsized influence in what happens at the table.
Randomization minimizes this area of referee influence, and makes
the game far more independent and immersive. Both the players and the referee
get the sense that the game world is independent of them, and thus both more “real”
and fairer. This latter point has been
one that my players have told me is important to them. They know I’m not “stacking
the deck” and making things either easier or harder on the PCs. Instead, by
using weighted tables and weighted odds distribution, the dice combined with
the environment determine how hard things will be. The players find this
combination to be particularly satisfying, they know when they overcome
challenges that they were not coddled or punished, but instead they rose to a
challenge and bested it, fair and square.