What are your opinions of RPG systems/mechanics with no random elements in them? No dice, no cards, no flipping coins, nothing of that sort. They could be mostly freeform (although that might be stretching the definition of "system"), based on resource management, discussions between players, push ups, acting or what have you.
Good? Bad? Could be better? Do you know any good games of the style? Etc.
Michael Diaz
>no random elements It's less of a game and more of a collective story telling system then.
Michael Evans
The website Storium works like that. It's like RPG in the form of writing prose.
Jeremiah King
>Chess is not a game
Hunter Myers
>Chess is a RPG system Can my bishop multiclass into rook?
Josiah Cooper
Look up fire emblem heroes, not rpg per say but it should give you an idea how it can be done correctly for combat.
David Reyes
WANG system, posted on Veeky Forums somewhere. Impossible to read, torturous to absorb, ideas actually not too bad.
Adam Robinson
Got any examples of such systems?
Without actually ever having played such a system, i think it'd work best for a very low-powered game, with no 'fights' and such. But to be honest i can't think of a reason to even use a system at all if you don't have an random element.
Logan Davis
Dic less system usually substitute dice rnd with player input, like (blind) betting chips and such
James Martin
>i think it'd work best for a very low-powered game, with no 'fights' and such Think again. The first proper system with no random elements was Amber Diceless Roleplay (where the characters are nigh omnipotent) and the most famous nowadays is probably Nobilis (where they play on a scale where "gods" are mooks to be discarded).
Colton Collins
It sucks. May as well write a book with your group
Nolan Morales
The point is that it is a game. It is possible for a game to be exciting without having a random element, because you're still playing it with other people whose input prevents it from becoming just a "matter of your own decision".
Sebastian Barnes
Okay, fair point, if you can do anything you can do anything, haven't even thought of that. Honestly, the only thing that came to my mind where Murder Mysteries, Horror and Slice of Life.
Zachary Price
The point in Amber was that the Amberites are so powerful that the only thing that can truly challenge them is another Amberite, and they're each defined by the things that they're good and bad at. Hence the whole bidding system for getting the highest attribute scores. The Amberite with highest Strength will ALWAYS beat anyone else in contests of strength, ever. So how do you beat him? You find someone whose better than him at something else.
Nobilis is a resource management system. If a Noble wants something done, they can probably do that, the question is whether they want it more than the other Nobles around and how much each of them is willing to sacrifice.
Brandon Perry
Resource management mechanics are fine, but everyone definitely needs to be on the same level. I'm also impartial to systems where you succeed or fail automatically based purely on trait levels, although those are best used for very slow paced games like investigations.
Either way, games like these don't lend themselves well to a huge focus on combat mechanics as they're traditionally represented.
Jace Rodriguez
My main experiences with that sort of thing would be all of the dozens of times people used Amber diceless to play as alt universe 40k primarchs,
Dread (Which was fun actually! Jenga should be a resolution mechanic in more systems.)
And "The Skeletons", where mechanical outcomes are decided by your ability to sit in the hotseat and rationalise your own backstory. Which also had some unique ideas.
My overall opinion is that none of these had actually hit on a single resolution mechanic capable of carrying a whole game, and I would really like a game with more varied and diverse resolution mechanics.
Josiah Foster
Again, WANG, if you can get through the creator's obnoxious hipster "if I pretend I put little enough effort into this I could look like Vincent Baker" bullshit.
Liam Price
I love Amber Diceless and Lords of Gossamer and Shadow.
But people are addicted to RNGs.
Thomas Collins
Innocents has a surprisingly decent resource management based mechanic. A lot of it is presented as being tied to the themes and realities of playing a child but honestly, if you just change the presentation a little bit (i.e. use tokens instead of candies, make "Physical/Mental Age" into "Physical/Mental Strength", turn "Imagination" into "Conviction", etc.) you could translate it into a generic system pretty well.
Zachary Morales
I really can't find any evidence that this is a real thing that exists.
Nathaniel Powell
Hifumi is very cute.
James Taylor
Saved for exactly such occasions. Note that the alternative resolution mechanics are spread throughout the supplements, the core mechanic is still a dice roll (although I guess you could grab any or all of the alternative ones and build a game around them).
Robert Davis
...
Zachary Wright
...
Kayden Torres
...
Samuel Powell
...
Joseph Sanchez
>Dread (Which was fun actually! Jenga should be a resolution mechanic in more systems.) Two things about Dread: 1) I personally would call the Jenga Tower random, or at least non-deterministic 2) For quite a bit i thought the game was called Dredd because i first heard about it mentioned in passing in a Podcast and in relation to a Cyberpunk game they ran...
Connor James
But what if you want to play a regular guy instead of a superbeing?
Evan Turner
Play Dread. Or if you're looking for a more generic experience, the version of Diceless Unisystem which doesn't use cards. Straight up comparison of scores, if your skill is high enough you succeed, if not you don't, GM may decide to give you a bonus based on your description.
Julian Bennett
The Jenga tower is intended to *feel* random, but ultimately there are only ever going to be about 3 tests per tower where the outcome isn't necessarily obvious ahead of time. I for one know the exact point at which I am no longer capable of playing a Jenga tower any further. The game largely encourages you to remove the uncertain elements as well, since you at least get to die heroically if you smash the tower deliberately.
Jonathan Diaz
Anyone mind extracting the good ideas for resolution mechanics so we don't have to wade through the unreadable bullshit to get to them?
Elijah Jenkins
Jenga isn't even fun on its own.
And not having randomity at all sound boring. Imagine sneaking across a room. A clumsy guy is less likely to do it quietly. But if he is super focused he could pull it off. A roll to see if he manages to stay focused is natural to me.
Elijah Campbell
>But if he is super focused he could pull it off Spend more of your "Focus" resource then. Or argue that to the GM. Or describe it as such. Are you that terrified of your own decisions, roleplaying or narrative abilities affecting the game, rather than a bit of plastic on the floor?
Lincoln Butler
Its a common misconception among people who haven't played it, but being good or bad at certain things is a thing in Dread. It's easy to miss a lot of the depth in the game if you only skim it, or only read up to the point that you think you know how to run it, but Dread actually has a lot of meat to it if you read the whole way through.
There are rules like "every player's worst fear must make one appearance per session as part of a description of something" etc.
Lucas Carter
Oh, and to clarify, some scrub with a pistol takes 3 draws to shoot the ayylium, whereas the master sharpshooter takes 1. That is the difficulty/skill mechanic at its most basic.
Joseph Brown
It's been a while since I've played the game, but isn't the rule that if your questions say you'd be good at an action, you don't need to draw at all?
William Ward
>my own ability to describe things decide how successful my character is I am not my character. Also, I describe things from the viewpoint of my character, but things external to him can affect his success
Luis Sanders
But if I am shit at jenga and the people I play with are not, doesn't that mean that they will have much more narrative control than me?
Brandon Harris
If you have bad luck with the dice, doesn't that mean the same thing? At least you can improve your Jenga skills if you work on it.
Jace Myers
Luck doesn't exist. Your dice can be worn in a way that makes them roll bad, but that's about it. So buy new dice. But if you have sausage fingers of if you are just clumsy you must practice at a game that in itself is boring just so you can play an RPG?
Sorry but what really what? What
Hunter Anderson
Xp penalties are too high man. Knight is the one you want multiclass into from bishop, although it's not that much evident, the features well complement bishop.
Asher Moore
Yes, but it involves a really difficult class change quest in which you have to travel to the other side if the map despite a complete army blocking your way. People have pulled it off, though.
Jose Moore
>Luck doesn't exist. Then this discussion is moot and there's no point rolling dice.
Kevin Brown
That luck doesn't exist does not mean that randomity doesn't.
Leo White
Cont. Luck is (would be) a way to make random chance less random by magically affecting it in some way.
Alexander Nguyen
"Luck" certainly does not exist as a fundamental force in the universe, but through the veil of ignorance that is humanity's bounded perceptions, luck influences everything. In this case, luck refers to the minutia that influence every action in the universe which we cannot perceive: the weathering of a die, the angle of a roll, the force (and direction of force) applied to said roll, the die's height from the surface of the table, etc. Every roll may have a predetermined outcome, but we cannot accurately measure all the factors which lead to that outcome with our naked senses, leading to an apparent randomness. We can't measure these things; we can't rationally deduce an outcome; we must have a mechanism to understand randomness, being human; we believe in luck. Luck exists in the human mind to explain this seeming randomness in the universe, and therefore, in one sense, luck does exist. It exists because we are not omniscient. TL;DR Luck doesn't exist, but we can't determine everything, so luck appears to exist to humans and that's what matters. Replace "luck" with "chance" if you want to. I'm not talking about bad luck/good luck, just randomness inherent in dice rolls.
Levi Brooks
But luck and chance are actually different things. You seem to think that the meaning of words is in itself meaningless. Also >things exist because I think they exist Belief in X is generally not X itself.
Lincoln Ramirez
Anyone tried the recipes?
Elijah Jenkins
You know full well what he meant. Someone who ends up rolling badly throughout the game. They lose their narrative power, too.
Luis Price
I admit I didn't understand the statement and assumed that "luck = randomness" in my reply. As for belief, "Luck exists in the human mind" =/= "luck exists in the universe": if a concept has a name, it exists, not necessarily in reality but in the mind. I can think of Luck. It has a name. It has a definition. It exists to me even if it has no power over my life, even if I do not believe in it, because it has been defined. Give it a name and it exists to you.